^Y  OF  PRWCf^ 
S^fOtOGICALSt*^ 


THE    GOSPEL 
EPISTLES    OF   JOHN 

CRITICAL,  EXPLANATORY,  AND  PRACTICAL, 
Designed  for  both  Pastors  and  People. 


REV.  HENRY  COWLES,  D.D. 


"  The  words  that  I  spoak  unto  j'ou,  they  are  spirit  and  they  are  life."— Jesus. 


NEW  YORK: 
D.   APPLETON  &  CO., 

549  &  551  Broadway. 
1876. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1S7G,  by 

KEY.  HEXRT  COWLES,  D.D., 

In  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washington,  D.  C. 


PREFACE, 


John  wrote  his  gospel  for  tlie  twofold  purpose — "that 
ye  might  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God ; 
and  that,  believing,  ye  might  have  life  through  his  name." 
The  Christian  commentator  can  have  no  other  Avorthy  object 
than  to  enter  into  the  spirit  and  promote  the  purposes  of  his 
author. 

In  the  present  case  he  has  no  occasion  to  aspire  to  any 
thing  higher,  and  can  have  no  apology  for  any  thing  lower, 
or  other.  To  reveal  Jesus  to  men,  so  that,  in  the  light  of  his 
words  and  of  his  deeds,  they  shall  see  him  to  be  surely  the 
promised  Christ,  the  very  Son  of  God,  and  therefore  the 
Giver  of  life  to  morally  dying  souls — this  is  supreme.  No 
object  can  be  higher  or  nobler ;  none  more  vital  to  real  sal- 
vation. To  know  Jesus  as  John  reveals  him  is  not  only  to 
know  that  he  is  sent  of  the  Father;  beai's  Avitness  to  the 
truth ;  suffered  unto  death  as  "  the  Lamb  of  God,  taking 
away  the  sin  of  the  Avorld,"  but  it  is  also  to  know  his  heart 
of  love  and  sympathy,  of  fellowship  with  his  people,  and  of 

most  tender  and  confidential  friendship. It  is  the  charm 

of  John's  writings  that  they  bring  Jesus  impressively  near  to 
the  heart,  and  beget  a  sense  of  personal  acquaintance  with 
the  Lord.  Under  such  apprehensions  of  Jesus,  our  love  to 
him  naturally  becomes  intellifjent  and  therefore  solid,  endur- 
ing, and  such  as  legitimately  develops  itself  in  joyous  obe- 
dience. 

In  my  Notes  on  John,  my  first  aim  has  been  interpretation 
— to  unfold  and  illustrate  the  true  and  the  whole  sense  of  his 
words.     The  amount  of  labor  expended  upon  passages  has 

(iii) 


IV  PEEFACE. 

been  in  the  compound  ratio  of  tlieir  difficidtij  and  of  their 
relative  importance.  In  this  as  in  former  volumes  my  plan 
presents  not  so  much  the  processes  of  my  investigations  as 
the  results,  and  not  so  much  other  men's  opinions  as  my 
own. 

A  few  passages  involving  vital  issues,  in  which  I  could  not 
be  satisfied  with  the  current  and  commonly  received  inter- 
pretations, have  been  treated  with  unusual  fullness ;  e.  g. 
(John  3:  5):  "born  of  water  and  Spirit;"  and  (John  20: 
23)  on  remitting  or  retaining  other  men's  sins.  Under  a 
sense  of  their  very  high  importance,  I  have  sought  to  unfold 
thoroughly  Clirist's  doctrinal  discussions  with  the  Jews  (John 
5  and  6) ;  his  views  of  their  moral  blindness  and  righteous 
doom,  as  in  John  12 :  37-41 ;  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy 
Spirit;  the  scenes  and  the  significance  of  Gethsemane  and 
Calvary ;  the  resurrection,  also,  and  not  least  the  true  divin- 
ity of  Christ  in  its  relation  to  the  trinity  and  unity  of  God. 

In  the  way  of  practical  application,  I  have  aimed  at  little 
beyond  suggestion.  This  field  is  naturally  unlimited;  my 
plan  allows  me  only  to  indicate  in  few  Avords  where  it  lies, 
but  not  to  range  over  it  at  will. 

The  Epistles  of  John  have  been  subjoined  as  a  natural 
appendix — the  author's  own  application  of  the  great  facts 
of  his  gospel  history.  I  trust  this  addition  will  not  prove 
void  of  interest  or  of  spiritual  profit. 

HENRY  COWLES. 

Oberlin,  O.,  January  28,  1876. 


THE    GOSPEL   OF  JOHN. 


GENERAL    INTRODUCTION, 


I.    The  Author. 

This  gospel  lilstory — the  last  in  order  of  the  four,  and  lat- 
est in  date  of  composition — is,  on  the  concurrent  testimony  of 
the  best  authorities,  ascribed  to  the  Apostle  John.  Notice- 
ably he  is  spoken  of  in  the  book  itself,  not  under  his  proper 
name  John,  but  as  "  the  discii:)le  whom  Jesus  loved."  (See 
13:  23,  and  19:  26,  and  20:  2,  and  21:  7,  20,  24)  The 
last  of  these  verses  indicates  him  as  the  author  of  this  book. 

The  testimony  in  proof  that  John  was  the  author  falls  nat- 
urally under  t^Yo  heads:  The  external,  i.e.  historical;  and  the 
internal. 

The  external  comes  to  us  in  the  earliest  writings,  more  or 
less  fragmentary,  of  the  Christian  age. 

In  sifting  this  testimony  it  should  be  borne  in  mind  that 
oral  tradition  respecting  the  words  and  deeds  of  Jesus  was 
earlier  than  the  apostolic  writings ;  and  moreover  that  (ac- 
cording to  Luke  1 :  1-4)  there  were  some  Avritten  memoirs 
put  in  circulation  by  others  than  the  apostles,  in  advance  .of 
theirs,  at  least  in  advance  of  Luke.  In  view  of  these  facts, 
Meyer  evinces  commendable  discrimination  in  omitting  from 
his  proofs  of  the  genuineness  of  this  gospel  history  sundry 
passages  in  writings  now  bearing  the  name  of  Barnabas  or 
Ignatius  (men  nearest  to  the  apostles),  and  a  portion  of  what 
comes  in  Irenteus,  on  the  ground  partly  of  some  doubt  as  to 
genuineness  in  the  case  of  Ignatius,  but  more  on  the  ground 

(1) 


2  GEx\ERAL  INTRODUCTION. 

that  the  passages  in  question  while  they  may  perhaps  have 
been  taken  from  the  writings  of  John,  may  also  Avith  equal 
probability  have  reached  those  writers  by  means  of  oral  tra- 
dition. To  make  the  proofs  satisfactory,  there  should  bo 
some  distinct  reference  to  a  written  document  like  this  gos- 
pel, and  a  somewhat  exact  quotation  of  its  language. 

With  due  regard  to  these  principles  we  may  name  Papias  -^^ 
as  perhaps  the  oldest  Avitness,  of  whom  Eusebius  affirms  that 
he  used  proofs  from  John's  first  epistle.  It  is  conceded  that 
this  epistle  and  the  gospel  were  written  by  the  same  John, 
so  that  testimony  to  the  genuineness  of  one,  makes  with 
scarcely  abated  force  for  the  genuineness  of  the  other. 

Of  the  same  nature  is  the  testimony  of  Polycarpf  who 
quotes  1  John  4:3;  "For  wdiosoever  does  not  confess  that 
Jesus  Christ  has  come  in  the  flesh  is  antichrist." 

Justin  Martyr  I  (Apology  I:  61)  quotes  from  the  conver- 
sation of  Christ  witli  Nicodemus  (John  3:5);  "  For  Christ 
said,  Except  ye  be  born  again,  ye  can  not  enter  into  the 

kingdom  of  heaven." "The  first  power  after  God,  the 

Father  and  Lord  of  all,  is  the  Word  who  is  also  the  Son ; 

*  Bishop  of  Ilierapolis  in  Pbrygia,  whom  Irena?us  describes  tlius: 
"An  ancient  man  who  was  a  hearer  of  John  and  a  friend  of  Poly- 
carp." 

t  Of  Polycarp,  wlio  fell  a  martyr  about  A.  D.  150,  IrentBus  his 
pupil,  has  this  striking  testimony  (Irena3us  II:  158,  159).  Writing 
to  Florinus,  he  says — "  While  I  was  yet  a  boy,  I  saw  thee  in  Lower 
Asia  Avith  Polycarp.  For  I  have  a  more  vivid  recollection  of  what 
occurred  at  that  time  than  of  recent  events  (inasmuch  as  the  experi- 
ences of  childhood,  keeping  pace  with  the  growth  of  the  soul,  become 
incorporated  with  it),  so  that  I  can  even  describe  the  place  where 
the  blessed  Polycarp  used  to  sit  and  discourse;  his  general  mode  of 
life  and  personal  appearance,  together  with  the  discourses  which  he 
delivered  to  the  peoijle ;  also  how  he  would  speak  of  his  familiar 
intercourse  with  John  and  with  the  rest  of  those  who  had  seen  the 
Lord;  and  how  he  would  call  their  words  to  remembrance.  What- 
soever things  he  had  heard  from  them  respecting  the  Lord,  both  with 
regard  to  his  miracles  and  his  teachings,  Polycarp,  having  thus  re- 
ceived information  from  the  eye-witnesses  of  the  Word  of  life,  would 
recount  them  all  in  harmony  with  the  scriptures,"  etc. 

X  Justin,  born  at  Sychem  (Palestine) ;  first  a  professional  student 
and  teacher  of  pagan  philosophy;  but  after  his  conversion  a  labori- 
ous missionary  of  the  gospel,  labored  among  the  churches  of  Asia 
Minor  and  also  at  Home  where,  near  the  middle  of  the  second  cen- 
tury, he  sealed  his  faith  with  his  blood.  Among  his  works  (of  great 
value)  are  two  Apologies  for  Christianity,  addressed  to  Roman  Em- 
perors, and  a  dialogue  with  Trypho  a  Jew,  elaborating  the  argument 
from  the  Old  Testament  that  Jesus  was  the  ^iessiah. 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  3 

and  of  him  we  will  relate  that  he  took  flesh  and  became 
man."     (Compare  John  1 :  1,  2,  14.)     Justin's  Apol.  1 :  32. 

Tatian,  a  disciple  of  Justin,  not  only  quoted  from  John's 
gospel  but  made  up  a  "  Diatessaron "  (this  Avord  signifying 
four  in  one),  the  first  effort  known  to  us  upon  a  harmony  of 
the  four  gospels.  This  of  course  assumes  the  existence  of 
the  four  in  his  time.     He  flourished  about  A.  D.  170. 

Athenagoras  -'-  evinces  a  familiar  acquaintance  Avith  what 
John  has  said  of  the  Logos,  to  which  reference  Avill  be  made 
in  a  special  essay  upon  the  relation  of  the  Logos  to  the  Trin- 

Meyer  in  his  commentary  (p.  14)  remarks  that  the  earliest 
of  the  Christian  fathers  Avho  quotes  John's  gospel  by  name  is 
TheophiluSjf  thus : — "Whence  the  holy  scriptures  and  all  the 
inspired  men  teach  us,  from  among  whom  John  Avrites :  'In 
the  beginning  AA'as  the  Word,' "  etc.  This  father  also  i>ve- 
pared  a  harmony  of  the  four  gospels. 

The  testimony  of  L-enasus  X  is  specially  valuable — to  the 
points  that  the  apostles  did  not  enter  upon  their  great  Avork 
of  preaching  the  gospel  to  every  creature,  nor  did  they  hand 
it  down  to  men  "  in  the  scriptures  to  be  the  ground  and  pil- 
lar of  their  faith  "  until  after  they  Avere  filled  Avith  the  Holy 
Ghost. 

Concerning  the  gospel  Avriters  he  specifies  thus  :  "MatthcAV 
issued  a  Avritten  gospel  among  the  HebreAA^s  in  their  own  dia- 
lect Avhile  Peter  and  Paul  were  preaching  at  Rome  and  lay- 
ing the  foundations  of  the  church.  After  their  departure 
[death],  Mark,  the  disciple  and  interpreter  of  Peter,  did 
also  hand  doAvn  to  us  in  Avriting  Avhat  had  been  preached  by 
Peter.  Luke  also,  the  companion  of  Paul,  recorded  in  a 
book  the  gospel  preached  by  him.  Afterwards  John,  the 
disciple  of  the  Lord,  Avho  also  had  leaned  upon  his  breast, 

*  Athenagoras,  foremost  among  the  fathers  of  the  second  century 
in  the  staple  merits  of  an  author,  was  a  Christian  philosopher  of 
Athens,  and  wrote  his  Apology  A.  D.  177.  His  themes  correspond 
with  those  of  Justin — treated,  however,  more  ably.  His  extant 
Avorks  are  usually  printed  Avith  Justin's. 

t  Theophilus,  made  bishop  of  Antioch  in  Syria,  A.  D.  1G8,  -wrote  a 
commentary  on  the  four  gospels,  not  now  extant. 

i  Irenoeus,  born  in  Asia  Minor,  trained  under  Polycarp  and  Pa- 
pias,  went  as  a  missionary  to  Lyons  and  Vienne  in  France  about 
A.  D.  150;  became  bishop  of  Lyons  A.  D.  177;  died  a  martyr's  death 
A.  D.  202.  His  great  work  against  the  heresies  of  his  age  stands 
among  the  choicest  and  most  insti-uctive  relics  of  the  second  cen- 
tury. 


4  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION. 

did  himself  publish  a  gospel  during  his  residence  at  Ephesus 
in  Asia."     (Irenreus  1 :  258,  259.) 

Irenjeus  quotes  often  and  largely  from  the  gospel  of  John — 
for  example  thus:  "John,  the  disciple  of  the  Lord,  desiring 
to  put  an  end  to  all  such  doctrines  [as  those  of  the  heretics 
referred  to]  commenced  his  teaching  in  the  gospel  thus:  'In 
the  beginning  was  the  Word,'"  etc.,  quoting  entire  John  1 : 
1-5.     (Irenajus  1 :  288.) 

Curiously  Irena^us  sometimes  gives  scope  to  his  fancy,  as 
we  may  see  in  his  argument  from  the  nature  of  things  as  to 
the  number  four,  that  there  must  needs  be  four  gospel  his- 
tories ;  no  more,  no  less ;  because  (he  says)  there  are  four 
zones  of  the  Avorld  in  Avhich  we  live  and  four  principal  winds ; 
and  the  cherubim  of  John's  Revelation  had  four  faces,  etc. 
(Vol.  I.  293).  We  may  accept  his  testimony  to  the  fact 
that  there  were  in  his  day  four  gospel  histories  extant,  and 
four  only,  while  we  demur  to  his  argument  as  to  the  reason 
why. 

The  external  testimony  to  the  early  reception  of  John's 
gospel  may  be  closed  with  the  fact  that  all  the  prominent 
heretics  of  the  second  century  (Marcion,  the  Valentinians, 
the  Montanists,  Coelsus,  etc.)  recognized  this  book  as  not 
only  extant,  but  of  admitted  authority  among  all  Christians. 
(See  Meyer,  pp.  15,  16.) 

Meyer  suspends  his  citation  of  individual  witnesses  with 
this  remark  (p.  19) :  "By  the  end  of  the  second  century  and 
from  the  beginning  of  the  third,  tradition  in  the  church 
testifies  so  clearly  and  uniformly  in  favor  of  the  gospel  that 
there  is  no  need  of  additional  vouchers  (e.  g.  Clement  of  Al- 
exandria, Tertullian,  Hippolytus,  Origen,  Dionysius,  etc.), 
Eusebius  (III:  25)  places  it  among  the  homologoumena " 
[universally  accepted]. 

The  nature  and  force  of  this  testimony  will  be  readily  seen 
if  we  consider  that  those  Christian  brethren  Avho  were  most 
intimately  associated  with  the  Apostle  John  when  he  wrote 
this  book  and  who  first  received  it  from  his  hands  must  have 
known  beyond  the  possibility  of  mistake  that  he  was  the 
author.  It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  great  body  of 
Christians  in  those  early  ages  appear  to  have  appreciated 
very  justly  the  value  of  inspired  writings  as  compared  with 
any  thing  whatever  not  inspired,  and  consequently,  the  crit- 
ical responsibility  resting  upon  themselves  in  this  particular 
point  of  accrediting  any  document  as  the  Avriting  of  apostles 
or  their  associates.     It  is  on  record  that  such  men  as  Justin 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  5 

Martyr  (A.  D.  MO-IGO)  ;  Origen  (A.D.  203-254);  Jerome 
(A.  D.  370-420),  visited  the  cliurches  of  Asia  Minor,  of 
Rome,  and  of  Palestine  and  Syria,  to  ascertain  from  those 
to  whom  the  E^^istles  were  addressed  and  among  whom  the 
gospel  histories  were  first  put  in  circulation,  Avhat  books  were 
written  by  accredited  apostles  or  under  their  immediate  su- 
pervision. Only  on  the  basis  of  substantial  testimony  was 
any  book  admitted  to  the  confidence  of  the  churches  as  com- 
ing from  inspired  men.  This  was  no  less  true  of  the  gospel 
histories  than  of  the  Epistles,  e.  g.  to  Rome,  Corinth,  Ephe- 
sus.  As  in  the  case  of  these  Epistles,  those  churches  i^rimarily 
addressed  were  the  original  witnesses,  competent  above  all 
others  to  testify  from  whom  they  came,  so  in  the  case  of  the 
several  gospel  histories,  those  churches  among  whom  they 
were  first  circulated,  and  for  whom  each  severally  Avas  spe- 
cially adapted  and  written,  would  be  the  primary  authority 
as  to  thei]-  authorship.  It  deserves  sjiecial  notice  that  these 
four  gospel  histories  bear  internal  marks  of  a  very  distinctive 
character.  From  such  marks  it  appears  that  Matthew  wrote 
primarily  for  Jewish  readers,  never  pausing  to  explain  what 
aU  Jews  must  understand,  and  quoting  the  Old  Testament 
scriptures  most  abundantly,  as  might  be  expected  of  an  au- 
thor himself  a  Jew,  writing  to  and  for  Jewish  readers. As 

to  INIark,  the  tradition  of  those  times  witnesses  that  he  had 
been  intimately  associated  with  Peter.  Correspondingly  the 
internal  conditions  of  the  book  are  met  if  we  suppose  it  pri- 
marily written  (like  Peter's  epistles)  for  "the  strangers  scat- 
tered abroad  throughout  Pontus,  Galatia,  Cappadocia,  Asia, 
and  Bithynia."  The  acciu'ate  memory  of  Peter  as  an  eye- 
Avitness  appears  in  the  minute  particulars  given  of  the  looks, 
actions,  and  manifest  emotions  of  the  chief  actors — not  to 
say  also  in  the  very  full  and  honest  account  of  Peter's  denial 

of  his  Lord,  and  of  his  tears  of  bitter  repentance. Luke, 

it  is  well  known,  traveled  and  labored  long  with  the  Apostle 
Paul.  Of  Gentile  origin  himself,  and  conversant  with  Gen- 
tile churches,  it  was  fitting  that  his  gospel  narrative  should 
adapt  itself  as  it  does  to  their  knoAvledge  and  Avants.  Luke's 
style  stands  highest  in  Greek  culture,  and  most  abounds  in 
allusions  to  the  current  liistory  of  the  Roman  Empire.  So 
it  should  if  indeed  he  wrote  primarily  for  those  churches 
Avhich  Paul  planted  throughout  most  of  the  provinces  of  that 

great  empire,  and  eA'en  in  her  very  capital. Of  John  it 

should  be  said  that  his  explanations  of  Jewish  usages ;  e.  g.  of 
their  marriage  customs  (2 :  6)  ;  of  the  Passover  (2 :  23,  and 


6  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION. 

6:4);  and  of  the  national  antipathy  between  Jews  and  Sa- 
maritans (4 :  9)  show  plainly  that  he  had  in  mind  other  read- 
ers than  Jews  in  Judea.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  his  internal 
marks  harmonize  most  entirely  with  the  testimony  of  early 
Christian  writers  that  ho  wrote  at  Ephesus,  and  with  special 
adaptation  to  the  churches  of  Asia.  Note  the  correspond- 
ing facts  of  his  seven  brief  epistles  to  the  seven  churches  of 
Asia,  in  Rev,  2  and  3.  All  those  churches,  therefore,  must 
have  known  this  aged  apostle  intimately.  Receiving  this  gos- 
pel history  from  his  hands,  they  were  of  all  men  the  most  im- 
portant witnesses  to  his  authorship.  It  is  simply  impossible 
that  on  this  point  they  could  be  mistaken. 

Thus  the  external,  historical  testimony  justifies  the  con- 
clusion that  the  author  of  this  gospel  was  the  Apostle  John. 
No  counter-testimony  of  any  importance  appears. 

INTERNAL   TESTIMONY. 

1.  The  book  throughout  bears  marks  of  having  been  writ- 
ten by  that  one  of  his  disciples  whom  Jesus  loved  preemi- 
nently, who  leaned  on  his  bosom  at  supper,  and  enjoyed  his 
intimate  confidence.  This  disciple  might  be  expected  to  re- 
member best  those  words  and  deeds  which  forjn  the  staple 
of  this  book.  The  spirit  of  the  book  is  in  beautiful  harmony 
Avith  the  spirit  of  the  Apostle  John  as  we  may  gather  it  from 
these  incidental  allusions. 

2.  The  book  corresponds  admirably  with  the  traditional 
notices  of  this  apostle  in  his  advanced  years — aflectionate, 
tender,  earnest — whose  spirit  appears  in  his  latest  exhorta- 
tion, "Little  children,  love  one  another." 

3.  The  date  of  this  gospel  coincides  with  the  great  age  of 
John.  Every  thing  indicates  that  this  gospel  was  written 
after  the  other  three;  and  all  history  testifies  that  John  long 
survived  all  the  other  apostles. 

4.  The  style  evinces  much  more  skill  and  familiarity  with 
the  Greek  tongue  than-  the  style  of  the  Revelation — favoring 
the  opinion  that  this  gospel  was  written  many,  perhaps  a 
score  of  years,  subsequently  to  the  prophetical  book.  (Tho- 
luck  and  Meyer.) 

5.  Finally,  no  other  man  known  to  history,  save  John, 
was  living  in  the  age  Avhen  this  gospel  history  was  written 
who  was  at  all  equal  to  its  production.  So  Neander  ex- 
presses himself  with  the  strongest  conviction  (p.  6)  : 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  7 

"It  could  have  emanated  from  none  other  than  that  'bch>vcd 
disciple'  upon  whose  soul  the  image  of  the  Savior  had  loft  its 
deepest  impress.  So  far  from  this  gospel's  having  been  written 
}ij  a  man  of  the  second  century  (as  some  assert),  we  can  not  even 
imagine  a  man  existing  in  that  century  so  little  afiectcd  by  the 
contrarieties  of  his  times  and  so  far  exalted  above  them.  Could 
an  age  involved  in  pci'petual  contradictions;  an  age  of  religious 
materialism,  anthropomorphism,  and  one-sided  intellectuajism, 
liave  given  birth  to  a  production  like  this,  which  bears  the  stamp 
of  none  of  these  deformities?  How  mighty  must  the  man  have 
been  who,  in  that  age,  could  produce  from  his  own  mind  such  an 
image  of  Christ  as  this!  And  this  man  too,  in  a  period  almost 
destitute  of  eminent  minds,  remained  in  total  obscurity!  Was  it 
necessary  for  the  master-spirit  who  felt  in  himself  the  capacity 
and  the  calling  to  accomplish  the  greatest  achievement  of  his 
day,  to  resort  to  a  pitiful  trick  to  smuggle  his  ideas  into  circu- 
lation?" 

FErwSONAL   HISTORY. 

The  Apostle  John  was  the  son  of  Zebedec  and  Salome ; 
brother  of  the  martyred  James  (Acts  12 :  2)  ;  a  fisherman 
by  occupation,  and  resident  on  the  shore  of  the  Sea  of  Gali- 
lee, otherwise  called.  Tiberias.  The  family  was  manifestly 
o.-  of  some  means.  The  fact  that  John  Avas  "  known  to 
the  ij.>h  Priest"  (John  18:  15,  16)  may  have  been  due  to 
his  business  relations  with  Jerusalem  as  the  chief  market ; 
perhaps  also,  to  his  social  and  religious  position  among  the 
leading  men  of  Jerusalem. Apparently  Salome  was  a  sis- 
ter or  sister-in-law  of  Mary,  the  mother  of  Jesus,  for  com- 
paring the  several  enumerations  of  the  Avomen  who  from  a 
distance  witnessed  the  crucifixion,  we  have  in  John  19 :  25, 
the  mother  of  Jesus  and  "his  mother's  sister;"  in  Matt.  27: 
56,  "the  mother  of  Zebedee's  children;"  and  in  Mark  15: 
40,  the  specific  name,  "  Salome."  On  this  supposition  John's 
relationship  to  Jesus  may  in  part  account  for  the  intimate 
and  tender  sympathy  betw-een  them. 

DATE   OP   THIS    GOSPEL. 

It  is  very  probable  that  John  did  not  locate  in  Ephesus  un- 
til after  Paul's  last  interview  with  the  elders  of  that  church 
(Acts  20 :  17-38),  inasmuch  as  his  presence,  supposing  him 
there  at  that  time,  could  scarcely  have  failed  of  some  notice 
in  this  narrative.  Even  Paul's  second  letter  to  Timothy, 
then  at  Ephesus  (about  A.  D.  67),  makes  no  allusion  to  the 
Apostle  John  as  being  there — not  to  say  that  John's  presence 


8  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION. 

there  would  have  obviated  the  necessity  of  sending  Timothy- 
there  at  all.  But  the  exigencies  of  those  seven  churches  of 
Asia  as  they  are  brought  to  view  in  Rev.  2  and  3,  may  be 
supposed  to  have  brought  him  there  from  Jerusalem,  and 
the  more  so  as  the  calamities  impending  over  Jerusalem  ad- 
monished not  only  the  apostles,  but  all  Christians  to  escape 
from  the  doomed  city.  Very  definite  historical  testimony 
proves  that  John  lived  to  a  great  age,  and  passed  the  closing 
years  of  his  life  with  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor,  at  or  near 
Ephesus.  The  fact  that  the  first  three  gospel  histories  very 
minutely  record  while  John  entirely  omits  the  prophetic  dis- 
course of  Jesus  with  his  disciples,  foretelling  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem  by  the  Romans  and  specifying  the  antecedent 
signs  of  this  catastrophe  (Matt.  24,  and  Mark  13,  and  Luke 
21),  may  be  accepted  as  proof  that  Matthew,  Mark,  and 
Luke  wrote  before  the  fall  of  the  city,  and  John  after.  How 
long  after,  no  existing  data  suffice  to  show  with  more  than 
proximate  precision.  The  most  probable  estimate  assigns  its 
date  betAveen  A.  D.  80  and  90. 

The  special  aim  and  purpose  of  this  gospel  history  deserve 
attention.  After  three  gospel  histories  were  already  extant, 
Avhat  worthy  object  could  call  for  a  fourth  ? 

Perhaps  anticipating  this  question,  John  himself  gave  the 
answer  which  we  find  (chap.  20 :  30,  31)  in  these  words : 
"Many  other  signs  truly  did  Jesus  in  the  presence  of  his  dis- 
ciples, which  are  not  written  in  this  book.  But  these  are  unit- 
ten  that  ye  might  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God, 
and  that,  believing,  ye  might  have  life  through  his  name." 
This  seems  to  be  very  definite.  His  purpose  Avas  to  prove  to 
his  readers  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  truly  the  promised 
Messiah  and  indeed  the  Son  of  God ;  and  further,  to  per- 
suade them  to  faith  in  him  as  such  in  order  that,  believing, 
they  might  have  life  —  the  true  gospel  life  of  salvation  — 
through  his  name.  Thus,  to  prove  the  great  gospel  &cts 
respecting  Jesus,  and  to  persuade  men  to  accept  him  by  cor- 
dial faith  unto  salvation,  were  the  two  coordinate  aims  of  this 
gospel  history. If  it  be  objected  that  this  passage  contem- 
plates rather  John's  aim  in  his  selection  from  Christ's  mira- 
cles than  his  general  purpose  in  the  Avriting  of  his  book,  it 
may  be  fitly  replied  that  a  very  considerable  portion  of  the 
book  hangs  upon  the  miracles  it  records ;  that  these  were 
introduced,  not  as  naked  facts  of  history,  barren  of  special 
pertinence  and  relations,  but  as  the  occasion  of  introducing 
those  vastly  important  discussions  Avith  the  JeAVS  to  Avhich 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  9 

tliey  gave  rise,  or  with  the  no  less  broad  purpose  of  showing 
forth  the  Messiah's  glory  to  his  disciples  and  friends.  The 
author  specifies  the  latter  as  the  purpose  of  Jesus  in  the  first, 
recorded  miracle  (John  2:  11).  The  discussion  with  the 
Jews  which  grew  out  of  the  healing  at  Bethesda  (John  5)  ; 
out  of  the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand  (John  6)  ;  out  of  the 
healing  of  the  man  born  blind  (John  9)  ;  out  of  the  raising 
of  the  dead  Lazarus  (John  11),  are  in  point  to  show  that  the 
selection  of  precisely  these  from  Christ's  many  miracles  had 
for  its  ulterior  object  the  proof  of  his  claims  to  be  the  Mes- 
siah, and  the  setting  forth  of  his  glory  as  one  "mighty  to 
save." 

In  studying  the  purpose  and  aim  of  this  gospel  history  as 
compared  Avith  the  other  three,  we  are  met  with  a  very  con- 
siderable difierence,  not  to  say  contrast,  in  its  general  char- 
acter. Thus : — John  omits  what  Matthew  and  Luke  give 
in  detail  resi^ecting  the  antecedents  of  the  human  birth  of 
Jesus ;  the  genealogy  of  Joseph  and  Mary ;  the  angelic  an- 
nouncements, and  the  various  incidents  of  his  early  history. 
On  the  other  hand  they  all  omit,  but  John  gives,  the  ante- 
cedents on  his  divine  side— how  the  divine  "Word"  was  re- 
lated to  God,  and  ultimately  "became  flesh  and  dwelt  among 
us." Li  the  line  of  historic  facts  John  omits  the  tempta- 
tion of  Jesus  in  the  wilderness,  his  transfiguration  on  the  holy 
mount  (though  a  personal  witness),  very  many  of  his  mira- 
cles, his  agony  in  Gethsemane ;  and  in  the  line  of  his  in- 
structions, John  passes  by  the  Sermon  on  the  mount,  his 
numerous  parables,  the  prophetic  announcements  respecting 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  etc.,  etc.  But  over  against 
these  he  records  matter  which  they  all  omit ;  e.  g.  the  per- 
sonal labors  of  Jesus  with  Nicodemus,  with  the  woman  of 
Samaria,  with  the  man  healed  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda,  with 
the  man  born  blind,  and  his  relations  to  the  loved  family  at 
Bethany,  and  the  raising  of  Lazarus;  and  especially  the  ex- 
tended discussions  with  the  hostile,  captious  Jews ;  also  the 
full  and  free  conversations  and  the  remarkable  prayer  with 
his  disciples  during  the  evening  preceding  his  arrest.  Com- 
prehensively we  might  say  the  three  earlier  gospel  histories 
give  the  ^noralifies  of  the  Christian  life ;  this  of  John,  the 
spiritualities.  Those  unfold  the  moral  law  in  its  principles 
and  aj^plications ;  this,  the  law  of  the  sjMritual  life  —  the 
relations  of  Jesus  to  his  people  as  their  bread  of  life,  their 
"good  Shepherd,"  their  sympathizing  Friend;  and  espe- 
cially the  doctrine  of  the  Comforter  —  his  mission  and  his 


10  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION. 

work.  The  former  are  characterized  by  the  Sermon  on  the 
mount,  the  royal  law  of  love  and  its  application  to  "  my 
neighbor : "  the  latter,  by  the  law  of  love  to  Christ  and  to 
the  brethren,  and  the  blessed  fruits  thereof. 

With  these  points  before  us  of  broad  distinction  between 
John's  and  the  three  earlier  gospel  histories,  it  seems  appro- 
priate to  ask — 

Was  this  gospel  Justonj  puiyosehj  made  supplemcntarij  to  the 
other  three! 

Beyond  all  question  it  is  largely  so ;  but  was  it  made  so 
of  definite  purpose — the  others  lying  before  him,  and  his 
mind  being  impressed  with  a  sense  of  their  deficiencies  and 

of  the  importance  of  supplying  them? Or,  did  this  gospel 

history  become  supplementary  in  a  way  mainly  or  altogether 
incidental,  and  without  set  purpose ;  i.  e.  as  the  result  of 
having  a  somewhat  different  special  aim  before  his  mind, 
such  as  he  has  himself  indicated,  and  by  prosecuting  it  in 

a  thoroughly  independent  way? The  latter  seems  to  nie 

most  probalile.  There  is  at  least  no  proof  that  John  had  the 
other  gospel  histories  before  him  at  the  time  of  his  writing. 
He  makes  no  such  allusion  to  them  as  we  find  in  the  Sec- 
ond Epistle  of  Peter  (3:  15,  16)  to  the  writing  of  his  brother 
Paul,  nor  such  as  appear  in  Luke  1 :  1,  2,  to  other  gospel 
narratives.  Yet,  writing  so  long  after  the  other  three,  it  is 
a  priori  probable  that  John  had  known  of  their  existence, 
and,  moreover,  had  seen  them,  and  had  at  least  some  gen- 
eral notion  of  their  contents. But  on  the  other  hand,  if 

he  wrote  with  those  gospel  histories  before  him,  purposely  to 
make  his  own  supplementary  to  those,  it  is  not  easy  to  ac- 
count for  the  discrepancies  which  he  suffered  to  exist  in  some 
points  between  his  history  and  theirs ;  as,  for  example,  in 
the  antecedents  to  the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand.  Why 
did  he  not  either  correct  them  if  he  thought  them  in  error, 
or  adjust  his  statement  to  theirs  if  he  knew  them  to  be  cor- 
rect ?  It  is  entirely  manifest  that  John  wrote  in  a  perfectly 
independent  way,  adhering  closely  to  his  proposed  object ; 
selecting  his  matter  and  giving  it  shape,  all  for  the  precise 
ends  Avhich  he  had  in  view.  He  therefore  stands  before  the 
world  as  an  independent  witness  to  the  great  facts  both  of 
the  historic  life  and  of  the  words  of  Jesus  which  he  record?. 
As  such,  his  gospel  is  of  priceless  value.  No  estimate  can  ex- 
aggerate its  importance  or  its  living  interest  and  vital  bear- 
ings upon  the  inner  life  of  his  people. 

Yet  other  points  claim  brief  attention. 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  11 

In  circles  of  German  criticism  it  has  been  gravely  objected 
to  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  John's  gospel  history 
that  its  JNIessiah  is  too  unlike  the  Messiah  seen  in  the  three  an- 
tecedent gospels,  and  therefore  can  not  have  been  the  same 
personage,  or  at  least  can  not  have  been  drawn  by  the  same 
divine  inspiration.*  As  those  critics  accept  the  historic 
INIessiah  of  the  first  three  gospel  histories,  they  claim  to  feel 
bound  to  reject  the  Messiah  of  John,  and,  consequently,  the 
record  itself. 

This  critical  objection  may  be  met  as  follows : 

1.  The  points  newly  or  more  fully  developed  in  John  are 
in  no  respect  inconsistent  with  the  character  and  work  of  the 
Messiah  as  presented  in  the  three  antecedent  gospels.  Sure- 
ly Matthew,  IMark,  and  Luke  have  rejDorted  nothing  of  the 
Christ  whose  words  and  deeds  they  record  which  is  incon- 
sistent with  his  true  divinity — nothing  which  precludes  the 
doctrine  that  the  personage  named  by  John  "the  Logos" — 
existing  from  eternity  with  God,  and  really  himself  God — 
assumed,  or  in  the  phrase  of  John,  "became"  flesh,  entered 
into  a  mysterious  union  with  the  Son  of  Mary,  and  became 
tiius  God  manifest  in  the  one  man  Jesus.  For,  observe,  the 
Jesus  Messiah  of  those  first  three  gospels  is  sinless,  so  that 
on  the  moral  side  there  can  be  nothing  incompatible  with 
his  being  really  divine  as  well  as  human.  He  is,  moreover, 
all-iuise;  he  made  no  mistakes.  He  is  all-powerful  for  any 
exercise  of  power  which  his  mission  called  for.  Ko  miracle 
needful  to  his  work  was  ever  too  stubborn  for  his  arm.  Thus 
we  might  expand  this  point  indefinitely,  to  the  preclusion  of 
any,  even  the  least  possible  inconsistency  in  supposing  that 
the  Messiah  set  before  us  in  the  first  three  gospels  was  really 
all  that  John  represents  him. 

2.  We  have  in  the  earlier  gospels  some  remarkable  fore- 
shadowings  of  those  great  points  which  are  the  staple  of  what 
is  most  peculiar  to  John  ;  e.  cj.  in  Matt,  11 :  27,  and  28  :  18, 
and  Luke  10:  22:  "All  things  are  delivered  unto  me  of 
my  Father"  ["all  power  is  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  in 
earth"];  "and  no  man  knoweth  the  Son  but  the  Father, 
neither  knoweth  any  man  the  Father  save  the  Son,  and  he 
to  whomsoever  the  Son  will  reveal  him ; "  or  as  put  by  Luke, 
"  No  man  knoweth  who  the  Son  is  but  the  Father,  and  who 

*  As  the  objection  is  plirased  in  Olshausen  (2:  288) — "The  Savior 
as  delineated  in  the  fourtli  gospel  appears  a  perfectly  diil'erent  per- 
son from  that  -which  he  is  described  to  be  in  the  three  other  gospels." 


12  GENEPtAL  INTRODUCTION. 

the  Father  is  but  the  Son,"  etc. "  All  things  delivered 

unto  me;"  "All  power  in  heaven  and   in  earth  given  to 

me:" Who  then  is  this  "mef"     Shall  it  be  assumed 

that  he  is  merely,  only,  a  man,  one  of  our  own  mortal  race? 

Note  further  ;    this  claim  to  have  received  from  the 

Father  the  investiture  of  supreme  control  of  the  universe  is 
backed  up  by  the  assertion  of  a  somewhat  in  his  nature  un- 
known to  all  but  the  Father,  and  indeed  that  himself  knows 
the  Father  as  no  other  being  in  the  universe  can  know  him. 
How  can  these  affirmations  be  true  of  any  being  lower  than 
the  Eternal  Word  who  "  was  from  the  beginning  wdth  God," 
and  who  "was  God?"  Let  it  not,  therefore,  be  said  that 
the  Divine  Word,  the  Eternal  Logos,  is  not  distinctly  fore- 
shadowed in  the  words  of  Christ  as  recorded  by  Matthew  and 
by  Luke. 

3.  The  points  specially  unfolded  by  John  (though  not  by 
him  alone  and  exclusively)  are  of  exceeding  vitality  and 
importance,  such  as  could  in  no  manner  be  spared  from  the 
Christian  system.  It  seems  pertinent  therefore  to  inquire 
briefly  how  it  came  to  pass  that  they  were  not  unfolded  in 
their  fullness  by  the  earlier  gospel  historians,  and  Avhy  they 
should  have  been  reserved  (to  such  a  degree)  for  John,  and 
to  a  period  so  late  ? 

My  reply  may  be  brought  mainly  under  three  heads  : 

(1)  From  the  beginning  it  has  been  the  divine  policy — un- 
questionably and  most  obviously  a  wise  one — that  in  shai^ing 
his  w^ritten  revelation  to  men  there  should  be  "progress  of 
doctrine."  As  in  the  history  of  all  human  science,  so  in  the 
"written  revelation  made  to  men  of  God  and  of  his  Avays,  the 
simpler  elements  come  first  in  order,  and  so  the  mind  is 
aided  to  rise  by  gradual  stages  of  advance  to  the  higher 
elements.  This  principle  appears  in  the  advance  made  by 
John  upon  the  earlier  gospel  historians. 

(2)  According  all  honor  and  all  efficiency  to  the  wnsdom 
of  the  inditing  Spirit,  we  may  yet  attribute  much  that  is 
peculiar  in  this  gospel  to  what  was  in  great  measure  special 
and  peculiar  in  John  himself.  His  mind  was  contemplative 
and  loved  to  go  into  the  deep  things  of  God.  His  heart 
Avas  affectionate,  and  for  this  reason  entered  into  the  deep- 
est spiritual  communion  Avith  Jesus.  There  Avas  a  reason  in 
his  inmost  being  why  he,  rather  than  any  other  one  of  the 
twelve,  should  lean  on  Jesus'  bosom  and  be  knoAvn  as 
"the  disciple  Avhom  Jesus  loved."  Hence  he,  more  than 
any  other  one  of  the  twelve,  caught  up,  studied,  and  re- 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  13 

membered  those  words  in  "which  Jesus  spake  of  his  rcla- 
liou  to  the  Father,  his  pre-existent  glory,  and  of  his  inex- 
pressible love  for  his  people.  If  we  assume  his  personal  re- 
lationship by  blood  to  Jesus  (as  above  noted),  this  fact 
may  have  had  some  bearing  upon  the  very  peculiar  inti- 
macy and  freedom  of  affection  and  confidence  which  existed 
between  them.  To  this  may  be  added  that  the  lapse  of 
years,  the  mellowness  of  old  age,  and  perhaps  a  careful  and 
profound  study  of  the  earlier  gospel  histories  may  have  com- 
bined to  impress  him  Avith  the  importance  of  having  the 
points  which  naturally  interested  him  so  deeply  brought  out 
in  the  greater  fullness  whicli  Ave  see  in  his  gospel  history. 

(3.)  Something  may  be  attributed  to  AA'hat  Avas  external 
to  his  later  life.  His  removal  from  Jerusalem  to  Ephesus 
— from  Palestine  to  Asia  INIinor — transferred  him  from  the 
atmosphere  of  JcAvish  to  that  of  Grecian  mind.  It  brought 
him  into  contact  Avith  ncAV  modes  of  thought,  and  Ave  may 
also  say  probably  Avith  ncAV  and  peculiar  receptivities  to 
truth.  The  Jews  Avere  the  staunchest  of  Monotheists,  It 
had  been  the  Avork  of  ages  to  impress  into  the  depths  of 
JeAvish  thought — "  The  Lord  our  God  is  one  Lord."  We 
find  in  this  gospel  history  by  John  that  they  stumbled  fa- 
tally over  this  offense — Jesus  claiming  to  be  equal  Avith 
God.  -  SomeAvhat  as  the  result  of  ages  of  providential  train- 
ing, they  could  bear  no  modification  of  their  monotheistic 
doctrine.  In  the  Grecian  mind  as  dcA'Cloped  in  Asia  Mi- 
nor and  in  Egyptian  Alexandria,  the  case  Avas  far  other- 
Avise.  The  doctrine  of  emanation,  applied  to  God,  Avas  no 
offense  to  them.  There  were  some  among  them  Avho  held 
that  the  Supreme  One  might  send  forth  from  himself  other 
beings  of  truly  divine  attributes,  and  had  done  so.  This 
sect,  currently  knoAvn  as  "  Gnostics,"  Avere,  it  is  thought  by 
many,  in  the  eye  of  John  Avhen  he  Avrote  this  gospel.  It 
may  be  supposed  that  one  inducement  to  write  it  Avas  to  set 
forth  the  true  view  as  opposed  to  the  subtle  errors  of  the 

Gnostic  sect. Furthermore,  it  may  be  suggested  that,  in 

the  capability  of  nice  distinctions  (one  of  the  strong  fea- 
tures of  the  Greek  tongue),  as  Avell  as  in  the  acuteness  of 
Grecian  mind,  and  in  the  absence  of  foregoing  prejudice, 
John  might  have  seen  special  facilities  and  inducements  for 
putting  forth  prominently  the  great  points  made  in  his  gos- 
pel history.  The  Avay  Avas  providentially  opened  for  the 
f'uller  development  of  the  real  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  in- 
cluding the  pre-existent  divine  person  of  Christ. 


11  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION. 

Another  point  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  discuss ;  for  al- 
though it  might  not  be  thought  of  by  those  who  make  small 
account  of  the  human  element  in  inspiration  but  large  ac- 
count of  the  divine ;  yet  it  is  wont  to  be  an  offense  to  those 
v/ho  on  the  other  hand  make  chief  account  of  the  human 
and  little  or  none  of  the  divine. 

The  question  is  raised — Did  John  record  these  extended 
conversations  of  Jesus  from  memory,  or  from  written  docu- 
ments made  up  at  or  near  the  time  of  their  occurrence? 
How  is  the  human  thought  and  mind  of  John  related  to  the 
facts  he  describes  and  the  si^eeches  he  records?  "Were  they 
given  him  by  direct  inspiration  ;  or  did  he  as  a  personal  wit- 
ness, seeing  and  hearing  for  himself,  come  to  his  knowledge 
under  the  normal  laws  of  the  human  mind? 

Let  it  be  considered  that  according  to  our  best  knowledge, 
not  far  from  half  a  century  intervened  between  the  historic 
events  and  the  writing  of  the  book.  What  can  be  said  of 
John's  remembering  the  events  and  the  spoken  words  with 
accuracy  for  fifty  years? 

I  suggest  these  points.  The  accurate  and  retentive  re- 
membrance of  transactions  seen  and  of  spoken  words  heard, 
depends  on  several  various  conditions : 

(a)  It  is  partly  a  thing  of  original  endowment,  some 
minds  being  far  more  gifted  in  this  respect  than  others. 

(6)  It  is  ah\^ys  a  thing  more  or  less  of  careful  culture 
and  practice.  Training  and  use  will  work  wonders.  It 
should  also  be  considered  that  before  printing  and  before 
books  came  into  current  use,  there  was  lar  greater  demand 
for  the  culture  of  memory  as  to  spoken  words  than  there 
has  been  since. 

(c)  Very  much  Avill  always  depend  on  the  viincVs  interest 
in  the  things  seen  or  heard,  and  upon  their  being  kept  fresh 
before  the  mind  by  frequent  repetition  and  by  deep,  absorb- 
ing reflection.  We  are  by  no  means  to  assume  that  John 
dropped  those  deeds  and  Avords  of  Jesus  from  his  mind  through 
the  lapse  of  those  fifty  intervening  years.  Rather  it  should  be 
assumed  that  no  day  i^assed  in  which  they  were  not  in  some 
aspects  present  to  his  thought  and  living  in  the  deeps  of  his 
heart's  emotions  and  aliections,  often  repeated  and  impressed 
in  his  preaching  and  conversation. 

(d)  Something  must  be  accorded  to  that  well  known  law 
of  mind  by  which,  fir  into  old  age,  the  scenes  of  youth  and 
the  impressions  made  in  the  earliest  years  of  life,  abide  in 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  15 

tlieir  freshness,  ■while  things  and  Avords  of  recent  date  fade 
out  of  memory. 

(e)  Though  last  not  least,  is  the  aid  of  "  the  Comforter." 
It  Avas  one  of  his  jiromised  functions — "  lie  shall  bring  all 
things  to  your  remembrance,  whatsoeyer  I  have  said  unto 
you."  We  need  not  interjoret  this  to  imply  any  violation  of 
the  laws  of  the  human  mind.  Under  these  laws  there  is 
ample  scope  for  the  effects  promised.  Verily  there  can  never 
be  any  lack  of  resources  in  the  Infinite  Mind  to  reach  the 
human  mind  which  himself  has  made  in  his  own  image,  Avith 
suggestions,  quickened  remembrance,  sanctifying  impressions. 

In  vieAV  of  these  points — all  germain  to  the  case — there 
need  be  no  stumbling  over  the  hypothesis  that  John  recorded 
Avith  sufficient  accuracy  for  all  the  j^urposes  of  vital  truth  the 
events  transacted  and  the  Avords  spoken  a  half  century  before 
he  made  the  record  Avhich  has  come  doAvn  to  us. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN. 


CHAPTER  I. 

The  author  first  introduces  the  great  personage  of  his  book  by 
setting  forth  his  true  divinity,  and  especially  his  relations  to  God 
before  he  became  manifest  to  men  (vs.  1,  2).  He  vras  supreme 
and  universal  Creator  (v.  3) ;  the  source  and  fountain  of  life 
and  light  to  men  (v.  4) ;  albeit  this  light  was  strangely  repelled 
by  a  benighted  vrorld  (v.  5).  Prominent  among  the  subjects 
brought  forward  in  this  chapter  is  the  mission  of  John  the  Baptist 
as  a  witness  for  Christ  (vs.  6-8).  Jesus  was  the  true  light  of  the 
world  although  so  strangely  repelled  by  his  ancient  people  (vs.  9- 
11).  Yet  some  did  receive  him,  thus  becoming  sons  of  God  by 
a  birth  truly  fi-om  God  (vs.  12,  13).  The  divine  Word  appeared 
in  human  form,  revealing  to  men  the  glory  of  the  Father  (vs.  14, 
18).  Again  the  author  reverts  to  the  testimony  of  John  the  Baptist 
(v.  15),  and  enlarges  upon  the  fullness  of  grace  and  truth  which 
comes  to  men  through  Christ,  other  and  greater  than  that  which 
came  through  Moses  (vs.  16,  17). Priests  and  Levites  are  com- 
missioned from  Jerusalem  to  interrogate  Jesus;  his  reply  (vs.  19- 
28).  John  sees  Jesus  approaching  and  bears  direct  testimony 
that  he  is  the  Lamb  of  God  and  the  Son  of  God  (vs.  29-34). 
Two  of  John's  disciples  follow  Jesus  and  invite  others  to  him  (vs. 
35-42).  Jesus  finds  and  calls  Philip  and  Philip  introduces  Na- 
thaniel (vs.  43-45) ;  what  Jesus  said  to  Nathaniel  closes  this  chap- 
ter (vs.  46-51). 

1.  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the  "Word  was 
with  God,  and  the  Word  was  God. 

Who  is  meant  by  the  "Word,"  is  amply  shown  by  the  descrip- 
tive points  presented  in  vs.  1-18,  but  especially  in  vs.  1-3,  14. 
The  personage  to  whom  this  peculiar  name  is  applied  can  be  no 
other  than  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God  with  special  reference  to 
what  he  was  before  he  became  manifest  to  men  in  human  flesh. 
This  "Word,"  having  been  "with  God"  from  eternity,  himself 
really  God,  "became  flesh  and  dwelt  among  us,  and  we  beheld  hia 
glory."  For,  according  to  v.  1,  before  he  thus  became  flesh,  he 
existed  even  "  from  the  beginning''  and  then  was  "with  God  and 

(17) 


18  GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I. 

was  God."  As  furtlicr  described  (v.  18)  he  "was  the  only  begot- 
ten Son;"  was  "in  the  bosom  of  the  Father;  "  and  having  come 
forth  before  the  Avorld  of  mankind,  declared  or  manifested  God 
to  them. 

"In  the  beginning  the  word  loas" — existed.  By  the  almost 
universal  consent  of  critics,  the  phrase  "  in  the  beginning,"  signi- 
fies in  the  past  eternity ;  before  time ;  before  the  world  was.  The 
author  must  have  thought  of  "the  Word  "  as  existing  before  this 
world  or  any  part  of  the  material  universe  came  into  being,  for 
he  affirms  that  "all  things  were  made  by  him,"  and  there  was  not 
the  least  occasion  for  saying  that  the  Creator  must  have  existed 
before  he  could  create.  Apparently  John  had  in  mind  the  first 
verse  of  Genesis;  "In  the  beginning  God  created  the  heavens 
and  the  earth."  We  may  infer  this  from  his  using  equivalent 
words,  and  from  his  reference  immediately  to  the  creation  of  all 

things  as  done  by  the  Logos. If  it  be  asked  why  John  uses 

"In  the  beginning"  to  denote  in  eternity  past  I  would  answer: 
In  the  poverty  of  all  human  language  to  express  the  idea  of  past 
eternity,  this  phrase  came  to  hand  as  the  nearest  approximation. 
In  the  beginning  the  Word  was  in  being — not,  came  into  being, 
but  was  already  in  being — before  any  thing  else  existed  with 
which  to  compare  it — before  any  epoch  from  which  to  date  his 
existence ;  farther  back  than  thought  itself  can  travel — back  of 
the  remotest  point  reached  by  the  boldest  outgoings  of  human 
search — there  was  the  eternal  Word  already  in  existence. 

It  should  therefore  be  carefully  remarked  that  John  does  not 
by  any  means  attempt  to  fix  the  date  when  the  "  Word  "  began  to 
exist,  but  only  to  help  us  conceive  of  his  existence  from  eternity 
liy  saying  that  at  the  earliest  point  we  can  think  of,  the  Word 

was  already  in  existence. It  should  be  noted  that  the  Greek 

Avord  for  "beginning"*  is  without  the  article.  If  John  had  re- 
ferred to  any  well  known  beginning,  to  any  definite  recognized 
epoch  as  the  point  at  which  the  Word  came  into  being  or  even 
was  in  being,  he  would  have  used  the  article.  Omitting  it,  he 
must  mean  that  at  first — at  that  intangible,  ideal  point  which  we 
may  conceive  of  as  the  remotest  point  possible  to  human  thought, 
then  and  there  the  Word  existed. 

"  The  Word."  Passing  on  from  the  inquiry  Who  was  the 
Word?  we  meet  the  question — Why  does  John  choose  this  Greek 
term  Logos,  as  a  name  for  the  eternal  Son  of  God  ? 

To  this  question  two  answers  have  been  given. 

(a)  That  this  name  is  chosen  with  an  eye  to  its  essential  sig- 
nificance, ^l1ord  meaning  that  which  conveys  thought,  which  car- 
ries truth  from  mind  to  mind.  With  this  may  be  coupled  the 
antecedent  usage  of  Scripture  which  associates  power  with  spoken 
words  as  uttered  by  the  Almighty. 

(b)  That  the  term  "Logos"  was  chosen  by  John  with  special 
reference  to  existing  or  foregoing  speculations  in  regard  to  the  di- 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I.  19 

vine  being,  e.  //.,  those  of  Plato  the  Grecian  philosopher  or  of 
Philo  the  Jewish,  coupled  also  perhaps  with  the  usage  of  the  Jew- 
ish Targums  which  in  some  cases  translate  the  Hebrew  terms  for 
God  by  the  circumlocution — "  The  Word  of  the  Lord." 

Instead  of  adopting  either  of  these  theories  to  the  entire  exclu- 
sion of  the  other,  I  prefer  to  attribute  a  measure  of  influence  to 
both.  The  first  named  is  altogether  natural,  and  moreover  is  quite 
in  harmony  with  the  cast  of  John's  mind — at  once  simple  and 
profound.  Hence  he  might  think  of  the  term  uiord  as  the  vehicle 
of  thought — the  medium  for  conveying  truth  from  one  mind  to 
another.  Tn  this  view  the  eternal  "Word  is  simply  the  revealer 
of  God :  his  mission  is  the  uttering  forth  to  the  apprehension  of 
intelligent  man,  or  more  broadly,  to  the  intelligence  of  all  created 

minds  the  truth  concerning  God. We  notice  that  John  makes 

this  function  of  the  Son  every-where  prominent.  "No  man  hath 
seen  God  at  any  time;  the  only  begotten  Son  hath  declared  him" 
(v.  18).  "Truth  came  by  Jesus  Christ"  (v.  17).  Jesus  himself 
makes  this  point  emphatic  :  "  I  came  into  the  world  to  bear  wit- 
ness to  the  truth"  (John  18:  37). 

Moreover  let  us  not  miss  the  great  fact  that  In  tlie  Holy  Scrip- 
tures God  does  honor  to  written  words  as  the  vehicle  of  truth  in 
respect  to  himself.  In  the  universe  of  matter  God  has  made  a 
lower  revelation  of  himself:  the  higher  comes  through  words, 
spoken  in  former  times  by  the  prophets ;  "  in  these  last  days  by 
his  Son"  (Heb.  1:  1,  2).  Abstractly  therefore,  yet  most  com- 
prehensively, the  Great  Eevealer  himself  may  fitly  be  named  the 
"Word." 

That  John  rather  than  Matthew,  Mark  or  Luke  should  originate 
this  usage  of  the  term  "Word"  may  be  due,  not  alone  to  his  met- 
aphysical cast  of  mind,  but  possibly  in  part  to  the  fact  that  it  fell 
to  him  as  one  of  the  gospel  historians  to  record  the  verbal  utter- 
ances of  his  Master.  Tlie  other  historians  give  his  miracles  ;  the 
great  deeds  that  filled  out  his  public  life:  John,  far  more  than 
they,  his  spoken  words — those  extended  discussions  which  he  had 
with  captious  Jews,  and  his  tender  conversations  with  his  be- 
loved disciples. 

Let  it  be  noted  also  that  while  the  term  Word  has  naturally  the 
primary  sense  of  that  which  conveys  thought — which  carries  truth 
from  mind  to  mind,  yet  the  Hebrew  writers  prior  to  John  had  as- 
sociated with  the  spoken  woi'd  of  God  the  idea  oi poiver.  "God 
said,  Let  there  be  light:  and  light  was"  (Gen.  1:  3).  "He 
spake,  and  it  was  done;  he  commanded,  and  it  stood  fast"  (Ps. 
33:  9).  "He  commanded,  and  they  were  created"  (Ps.  148:  5). 
"He    scndeth  forth   his    commandment  upon    earth;    his   word 

runneth  very  swiftly"  (Ps.  147:  15,  18). This  accessory  idea 

in  the  term  logos  made  it  still  more  appropriate  for  John's  pur- 
pose. 

It  seems  to  me  legitimate  to  sustain  this  view  by  appeal  to 
John's  analogous  use  of  the  terms  "Life,"  "Light,"  ""Truth." 
If  it  be  objected  that  the  term  "  word"  denotes  not  the  speaker 


20  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAr.  I. 

but  the  tiling  spoken,  so  (it  may  be  replied)  does  the  term  "  life  " 
denote  properly  the  abstract  entity  and  not  its  author  and  source ; 
"light'  is  that  by  means  of  which  we  see  and  not  the  Light- 
bearer;  the  word  "truth"  denotes  properly  the  abstract  idea  and 
not  its  Revealer,  yet  in  almost  the  same  breath  John  calls  the 
Eternal  Son  first  "  the  Word ; "  then  the  Life,  the  Light,  the 
Truth.  "The  Life  was  the  Light  of  men"  (v.  4).  "That  was 
the  true  Light  which  is  coming  into  the  world"  (v.  9).  "  For  the 
Life  was  manifested,  and  we  have  seen  and  bear  witness,  and  show 
unto  you  the  Eternal  Life  who  was  with  the  Father,  and  was  mani- 
fested unto  us"  (1  John  1 :  2). Here  the  argument  is  that  this 

usage — the  abstract  term  for  the  concrete — a  name  significant  of 
what  he  does,  applied  to  designate  the  Great  Agent  himself — 'is 
shown  to  be  in  harmony  with  John's  cast  of  mind  and  habits  of 
expression,  and  therefore  goes  far  to  sustain  the  theory  that  he 
gives  the  name  icorcl  to  the  Eternal  Son,  in  part  at  least  because 
he  came  to  men  with  the  truth  concerning  God  clothed  in  human 
speech. 

Yet  while  I  make  chief  account  of  this  prime  significance  of 
the  term  "word"  as  the  reason  for  John's  use  of  it  here,  I  see 
no  occasion  to  rule  out  the  other  reason  noticed  above,  viz :  the 
fact  that  in  the  philosophical  speculations  of  the  Greeks  and  Jews 
as  seen  in  Plato,  Philo  and  in  the  apocryphal  books  ("  Wisdom  of 
Solomon"  9:  9-11,  17  and  Ecclesiasticus  24),  there  had  been  an 
approximation  toward  this  usage  of  the  term  "word,"  or  its  cor- 
relate, "  wisdom."  With  an  eye  upon  this  usage,  and  with  the 
purpose  of  correcting  its  misconceptions,  and  filling  out  more 
fully  the  great  idea  of  which  those  philosophers  had  scarcely  the 
germ,  John  may  have  defined  and  expanded  the  sense  of  this 
term  Logos. 

"The  Word  was  with  God."  No  just  interpretation  of  this 
clause  can  drop  below  the  implication  of  some  sort  of  distinct 
personality.  The  preposition  "  with"  does  not  indeed  define  the 
precise  sense  or  give  the  exact  measure  of  this  personal  distinc- 
tion; but  it  certainly  forbids  absolute  identity.  The  "Word" 
must  therefore  be  somewhat  difierent  from  and  other  than  God — 
else  he  could  not  with  propriety  be  said  to  be  "  with  God."  " 

"•■■  The  Greek  student  would  notice  that  the  preposition  for  ivith  is 
not  meia  which  would  suggest  companionship,  intimate  association  ; 
nor  is  it  sun  which  would  indicate  a  yet  closer  fellowship;  but  it  is 
pros — the  primary  and  usual  sense  of  which  is  to  be  in  front  of,  as 
when  one  thing  is  in  the  presence  of  or  before  another — suggesting 
therefore  that  the  Logos  is  the  visible  manifestation  of  God ;  is  that  of 
God  which  is  put  forward  and  becomes  patent,  apprehensible,  visible, 
to  his  creatures.  Yet  a  few  cases  of  New  Testament  usage  are  found 
in  which  pros  is  translated"  with."  Thus:  "Are  not  his  sisters 
all  with  us?"  (Matt.  13:  56).  "Are  not  his  sisters  here  iviih  usl" 
(Mark  6 :  3).  In  these  cases  however  pros  might  be  taken  in  the 
sense — be/ore  ua;  in  our  presence.     Also  Mark  9:  19,  "0  faithless 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I.  21 

"And  the  word  Avas  God" — not  merely  was  godlike;  not,  was 
simply  divine  in  the  loose  transcendental  sense  in  Avhich  great 
men  and  their  great  thoughts  and  deeds  arc  sometimes  spoken  of 
as  divine.  Nor  in  the  opposite  extreme  does  the  phrase  mean  that 
the  Word  was  the  God — the  only  God ;  the  God  in  the  exclusive 
sense  which  should  comprise  within  himself  all  there  is  of  God. 
This  exclusive  sense  would  have  been  indicated  by  the  Greek  ar- 
ticle if  it  had  been  used  here.  But  standing  without  the  article, 
the  sense  must  be — Avas  truly  and  essentially  divine.  The  ancient 
exposition  "very  God"  is  felicitous,  in  the  sense — nothing  less 
than  God,  yet  not  excluding  those  other  equally  divine  persons — 

the  Father  and  the  Spirit.  * Yet  again  ;  To  translate,  "  was  the 

God,"  meaning  the  whole  of  God,  would  nullify  what  John  had 
just  said — "was  with  God,"  for  it  would  render  such  a  fact  im- 
possible. Nor  can  we  translate — The  Word  was  a  God — for  this 
would  imply  an  absolutely  distinct  being — another  God — a  state- 
ment revolting  to  the  whole  current  of  Scripture,  both  of  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  New. 

2.  The  same  was  in  tlie  beginning  with  God. 

"The  same  was  in  the  beginning  with  God." "  The  same  " 

— this  very  Logos  ;  literally — this  one ;  this  personage. Note 

that  v.  2  brings  together  the  first  and  second  clauses  of  v.  1.  In 
that  verse  John  had  said  two  things,  viz :  that  the  Word  was  in 
the  beginning ;  and  that  the  Word  Avas  xuith  God.  In  v.  2  he 
affirms  that  the  Word  Avas  Avith  God  in  the  beginning — i.  e.,  before 
the  first  act  of  creation;  during  the  past  eternity.  Whatever  the 
relation  expressed  by  icith,  it  Avas  not  a  thing  of  time  only;  was 
not  of  recent  occurrence  or  of  transient  duration,  but  had  existed 
coeval  with  the  existence  of  God.  This  point  John  makes  em- 
phatic by  his  perfectly  explicit  affirmation  in  this  verse. More- 
over it  is  supposable  that  one  object  in  repeating  "was  with  God" 
may  have  been  to  guard  the  reader  against  the  possible  misappre- 
hension aboA'e  referred  to,  viz:  supposing  "the  Word"  to  com- 
prehend the  whole  Godhead. 

8.  All  things  Avere  made  by  him  ;  and  Avithout  him  was  not 
any  thing  made  that  Avas  made. 

All  things  became  existent — began  to  be — by  him;  and  without 
his  agency  has  nothing  ever  come  into  being.  That  the  divine 
Word  created  the  entire  universe — has  been  universal  Creator — 
is  affirmed  in  the  strongest  possible  language,  first  by  the  term 
"all;"  second,  by  excluding  all  other  creatoi'ship — cA^ery  other 
creative  agency  but  his. 

generation!  how  long  shall  I  be  with  you?"  i.  e.  going  out  and  in 
before  you.  So  1  Cor.  10 :  6,  7  :  "It  may  be  that  I  Avill  winter  jciih 
you.     I  trust  to  tarry  awhile  with  you"  (i.  e.  in  your  society). 

••■  For  a  more  extended  discussion  of  the  divinity  of  Christ  as  re- 
lated to  the  Trinity  of  the  Godhead,  see  Excurgus  I  in  the  Appendix. 
2 


22  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I. 

It  sliould  1)0  noted  that  although  in  this  passage  no  allusion  is 
made  to  any  agency  of  the  Father  in  creation,  yet  elsewhere  in 
the  New  Testament  his  agency  is  brought  to  view,  and  that  of  the 
Son  is  represented  as  being  mediate,  executive :  e.  g.  "  In  God  who 
created  all  things  hy  Jesus  Christ"  (EjDh.  3  :  9).  "  By  whom  (his 
Son)  he  (God)  made  the  worlds"  (Heb.  1 :  2).  We  also  find  forms 
of  statement  entirely  coincident  with  this  of  John,  e.  g.  "  For  by 
him  (the  Sou)  were  all  things  created  that  are  in  heaven  and  that 
are  in  earth;  visible  and  invisible;  whether  they  be  thrones  or 
dominions,  or  principalities  or  powers ;  all  things  were  created  by 

him  and  for  him"  (Col.  1 :  16). In  yet  another  passage  (1  Cor. 

8  :  6)  the  concurrent  agency  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Spirit  is  put 
in  this  form  :  "  But  to  us  there  is  but  one  God,  the  Father,  of  whom 
are  all  things  and  we  in  him  ;  and  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by  whom 
are  all  things  and  we  by  him."  This  passage  from  Paul  has  the 
metaphysical  precision  characteristic  of  his  clear  thought  and 
nicely  adjusted  words. 

If  now  the  question  be  asked.  Why  did  John  at  this  point  intro- 
duce the  "Word"  as  Creator — a  fact  touched  in  this  connection 
only  in  this  one  short  verse  and  not  referred  to  again ;  it  may  be 
answered: — {a)  For  the  sake  of  the  great  fact  itself: — (6)  To  con- 
firm and  enforce  the  idea  of  his  true  divinity:  "He  Avho  built  all 
things  is  God"  (Heb.  3:  4). — {c)  To  give  greater  breadth  to  the 
conception  of  the  Eternal  Word  as  the  Revealer  of  God.  Naturally 
the  Word  should  be  thought  of  as  the  Messenger  of  God  to  men  by 
his  written  revelation,  being  comprehensively  the  true  word  of  God 
to  men.  But  there  is  another  grand  department  of  God's  revela- 
tion of  himself — viz.,  that  which  is  made  throngh  the  universe  of 
matter — here  ascribed  equally  to  the  divine  Son  of  God. — {d)  In- 
cidentally this  verse  augments  the  proof  that  John  has  before  his 
mind  the  first  words  ofMosea  (Gen.  1 :  ]),  in  which  God  is  intro- 
duced to  mankind  as  the  Creator  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth. 

Comparing  with  each  other  the  respective  introductions  to  their 
several  histories  as  given  by  Mathew  and  Luke  on  the  one  hand 
and  by  John  on  the  other,  we  may  note  that  while  the  two  former 
put  in  the  foreground  the  human  birth  and  antecedents  of  Jesus, 
the  latter  gives  first  the  divine  antecedents  of  the  Eternal  Word 
who  became  flesh — i.  e.  came  down  to  dwell  as  man  among  us. 
The  former  trace  the  genealogy  of  the  man  Jesus  to  Adam,  Abra- 
ham, and  David;  the  latter  labors  to  carry  us  back  to  the  position 
and  relations  of  that  exalted  divine  Personage  who  was  in  being 
before  the  world  was,  coexisting  eternally  with  the  Father,  and 
really  himself  God.  If  the  former  sought  to  support  the  Messiah- 
ship  of  Jesus  by  showing  that  he  was  truly  the  Sou  of  David,  the 
latter  sought  equally  to  prove  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ  the  Son  of 
God  (John  20:  31)  "in  order  that  believing"  on  such  a  Savior 
"  we  might  have  life  through  his  name."  Thus  appropriately  each 
author  in  the  very  manner  and  scope  of  his  introduction  fore- 
shadows the  drift  of  his  book. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I.  23 

4.  In  lilni  was  life ;  and  the  life  was  tlie  light  of  men. 

"In  him  is  life"  [vs  rather  than  "was,"  on  the  hest  authori- 
ties]— tlie  present  tense  implying  that  life  is  in  him  forevermore, 

and  is  not  a  transient,  temporary  endowment. In  him  is  life, 

moreover,  not  in  the  sense  merely  that  he  exists,  hut  far  beyond 
this — that  he  is  the  great  and  sole  Life-giver — the  infinite  Foun- 
tain of  Life. 

Yet  further  we  must  ask — In  what  sens.e  of  the  word  "life?" 

Tliis  word  being  used  here  with  no  limitation  whatever,  we 

must  interpret  it  in  the  absolutely  universal  sense — all  life  in  the 
universe.  Yet  the  context  shows  that  John's  thought  is  specially 
upon  moral,  spiritual  life ;  for  he  proceeds  to  say,  this  life  brings 
light  to  men — not  sunlight  to  the  eye  of  the  body,  but  the  light  of 
God  to  human  souls,  that  liglit  which  terminates  in  salvation  as  its 

end. Following  closely  the  course  of  John's  thought — the  laws 

of  suggestion  under  which  one  thought  follows  another — we  may 
assume  that  he  passes  from  Creatorship  which  gives  existence  to 
matter  and  animal  life  to  sentient  beings,  to  this  far  higher  func- 
tion exercised  upon  a  lost  race  dead  in  sin,  which  offers  life  in  the 
rich  and  glorious  sense  of  restoration  to  God,  to  hope  and  to  bliss. 
He  who  first  gave  physical  existence  to  all  that  is — vegetable  oi- 
animal — advances  to  the  analogous  yet  nobler  function  of  breath- 
ing life  into  souls  dead  in  moral  ruin. 

"This  life  was  the  light  of  men."  It  developed  its  power  by 
means  of  truth — which  shows  that  its  action  takes  effect  upon  in- 
telligent mind,  not  upon  non-intelligent  matter.  For  certainly 
"light"  here  must  refer  to  mind — must  be  not  sunlight  upon 
the  material  eye,  but  the  light  of  God  upon  darkened  understand- 
ings.    The  subsequent  context  demands  this  spiritual  sense  of  the 

word. This  light  concerning  God  stands  naturally  correlated  to 

the  life  which  resurrects  human  souls  from  death  in  sin  to  recon- 
ciliation, peace,  love,  and  blessedness  in  God. 

5.  And  the  light  shineth  in  darkness;  and  the  darkness 
comprehended  it  not. 

Our  translators  should  have  fullowed  the  original  and  inserted 
the  article  before  "darkness" — shineth  in  the  darkness — the  well 

known  moral  darkness  of  a  fallen  race. As  material  light  might 

be  supposed  to  labor  to  pierce  into  the  dense  darkness  [e.  g.  of  a 
London  fog]  but  meet  only  repulsion,  so  this  precious  light  from 
heaven  poured  itself  forth  upon  the  darkness  of  benighted  souls 
the  world  over,  but  alas  !  this  darkness  would  not  admit  its  heavenly 

rays. "  Woidd  not"  is  the  appropriate  phrarse  in  this  case  ;  for 

while  in  the  material  world  light  naturally  penetrates  and  scatters 
away  darkness,  and  we  never  think  of  darkness  as  making  inten- 
tional or  even  natural  opposition,  it  is  entii'ely  otherwise  in  the 
spiritual  world.  For  here  the  very  mischief — the  real  virus  of 
darkness  is  its  moral  repugnance  to  Heaven's  light — the  alarming 
and  guiltv  fact  being  that  men  love  darkness  rather  than  hVht,  and 


24  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I. 

therefore  do  not  make  light  welcome — not  even  this  glorious  light 
from  heaven,  emanating  from  "  the  Father  of  lights,"  the  very  God 
of  love. 

6.  There  was  a  man  sent  from  God,  whose  name  tvas  John. 

7.  The  same  came  for  a  witness,  to  bear  witness  of  the 
Light,  that  all  vien  through  him  might  believe. 

8.  He  Avas  not  that  Light,  but  teas  sent  to  bear  witness  of 
that  Light. 

This  transition  to  John  the  Baptist  may  seem  at  first  view  ahrupt. 
If  so,  a  closer  attention  will  show  that  the  evangelist  passes  from 
the  general  statement  in  regard  to  the  moral  darkness  of  the  race 
repelling  the  light  of  God,  to  particulars,  to  show  the  antecedent 
steps  taken  in  the  kind  providence  of  God  to  secure  a  favorable 
reception  for  the-  Great  Revealer  of  heavenly  light  when  he  should 
come. 

"  There  was*  a  man,"  etc.,  we  might  paraphrase — It  came  to 
pass  under  the  divine  economy  that  a  man  was  sent  from  God 
(after  the  manner  of  the  old  prophets)  whose  name  was  John. 
The  specific  and  sole  purpose  of  his  divine  mission  was  to  bear 
witness  to  Jesus,  the  great  Light  about  to  appear  from  God,  to  the 
end  that  all  men  through  him  {i.  e.  through  the  influence  of  his 
antecedent  teaching  and  testimony)  might  believe  in  Jesus  when 
he  should  come.  He  was  not  that  great  Light  of  whom  I  have 
spoken,  but  was  sent  to  prepare  the  way  for  his  reception  as  the 
long  promised  Messiah.  Thus  the  evangelist  introduces  John  the 
Baptist. 

9.  Tliat  was  the  true  Light,  wliicli  lighteth  every  man 
that  cometh  into  the  world. 

Here  the  writer  would  prove  that  Jesus  (not  John  the  Baptist) 
is  the  true — i.  e.  the  real,  genuine  light  from  heaven.  In  v.  8  he 
had  said  that  John  was  not  that  great  Light  but^came  to  bear  wit- 
ness to  him  who  was.  Continuing  the  discrimination,  he  sub- 
joins— "The  true  Light  was  that  which,  coming  into  the  world, 
enlightens  every  man."  The  universality  of  his  work  is  its  token 
and  identification.  He  came  to  bring  the  light  of  God,  not  to 
Jews  alone;  not  to  Jews  and  their  proselytes;  but  to  Jews  and 
Gentiles  without  distinction  ;  to  all  men  of  every  race  and  clime. 

Critics  differ  on  the  point  whether  the  phrase  "  coming  into 

the  world,"  is  said  of  this  "Light,"  or  of  "  every  man."  Gram- 
matically either  is  admissible.  1  incline  to  connect  as  above  with 
the  "  Light,"  (Jesus  Christ),  because  his  coming  into  the  world 
is  a  very  prominent  thought  throughout  this  entire  passage,  kept 
constantly  before  the  mind ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  connected 
with  "  every  man,"  it  seems  altogether  inept  and  purposeless. 
What  does  it  add  to  the  significance  of  the  words  "  every  man?" 

*  Greek,  "Ejei'fro,"  it  came  to  pass. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— C[IA1\  I.  20 

Is  there  a  tacit  allusion  to  some  men  Avho  do  7wi  "come  into  the 
world"  and  so  foil  of  seeing  this  liglit?  Does  the  writer  make 
this  a  special  point — that  only  those  men  who  come  into  this 
world  receive  this  light?  This  is  scarcely  supposable.  But  he 
does  wish  to  impress  the  fiict  that  Christ  cayne  into  this  world — 
from  heaven  to  earth — on  the  grand  mission  of  bringing  down  the 
light  of  God  to  all  of  every  race  ^\\\o  Avould  receive  it. More- 
over the  Messiah  had  long  been  known  as  the  coming  one  ;  "  he 
that  should  come" — the  word  ))eing  the  same  as  here.  (Matt. 
11:3,  and  21  :  9,  and  Luke  7:  19,20,  and  John  G  :  14,  and  11  : 
28,  and  12:  13). 

10.  He  Avas  in  the  world,  and  tlie  world  Avas  made  by 
him,  and  the  world  knew  him  not. 

11.  He  came  unto  his  own,  and  his  own  received  him 
not. 

Note  how  the  writer  amplifies  his  suliject,  reiterates  and  re- 
arranges his  points,  to  express  his  amazement  at  the  strange  re- 
pulsion which  this  Light  from  heaven  received.  He  actually 
came  down  into  this  very  world  in  person  :  indeed  the  material 
world  was  his  own  creation,  and  moreover  he  gave  all  living  men 
their  very  being;  and  yet  these  minds  made  intelligent  by  his 
own  gift,  would  not  know  him.  lie  came  unto  a  people  specially 
selected  ages  before  to  be  his  own,  and  even  they  did  not  (as  a 

nation)  receive  him.*' The  coming,  specially  in  mind,  is  that 

of  his  incarnation  rather  than  his  antecedent  manifestations  to 
Israel  through  prophets  or  providential  agencies. 

12.  But  as  many  as  received  him,  to  them  gave  he  power 
to  become  the  sons  of  God,  even  to  them  that  believe  on  his 
name : 

13.  Which  were  born,  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the  will  of  the 
flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of  man,  but  of  God. 

While  most  of  his  originally  chosen  people  rejected  their  I\Ics- 
siah  a  few  received  him  by  faith — a  faith  of  the  sort  that  both 
believes  and  loves — and  so  became  "  Sons  of  God."  "  Forcer  "  to  be- 
come God's  sons — in  the  sense  of  prerogative,  high  privilege.  The 
power  contemplated  seems  not  to  be  a  new  moral  ability  by  means 
of  which  alone  the  recipient  could  exercise  saving  faith,  for  the 
receiving  of  him  by  faith  precedes  in  the  order  of  nature  this  bles- 
sing of  sonship  toward  God.  To  such  as  had  received  him,  he  gave 
this  right  or  privileice. 

"Who  were  born, '  (z.  e.  became  sons  of  God)  "not  of  blood 

*  The  Greek  reader  would  notice  the  difference  of  gender.  He  came 
inito  his  own  things  {ja  i6(a,  neuter),  and  his  own  people  {oi  idiot, 
masculine)  did  not  receive  him.  Israel  considered  as  God's  inherit- 
ance, the  home  of  his  sanctuary,  is  a  thinff — a  possession,  truly  his 
own  ;  the  people  acting  as  men  on  their  personal  moral  responsibility, 
are  persons,  as  tlie  masculine  gender  implies. 


26  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I. 

(not  by  lineal  descent  from  Abraham  as  the  Jcm^s  of  that  day  as- 
sumed)— not  of  the  impulses  of  the  flesh  as  in  all  human  birtlis  ; 
— not  of  any  merely  human  willing  or  action,  but  of  God,  by 
virtue  of  his  grace  alone.  The  sonship  of  believers  is  all  of  God. 
Whoever  will  receive  Christ  by  faith  as  his  own  personal  Savior 
is  adopted  (or  born)  into  the  family  of  God  as  a  son.  The  being 
born  is  simply  and  only  being  made  sons  of  God.  As  many  as  re- 
ceive Christ  God  receives  into  sonship — brethren  of  Christ. 

14.  And  the  Word  was  made  flesli,  and  dwelt  among  us, 
(and  we  beheld  his  glory,  the  glory  as  of  the  only  begotten 
of  the  Father,)  full  of  grace  and  truth, 

"  The  Word  Avas  made  flesh" — the  very  phraseology  suggest- 
ing the  poverty  of  human  language  to  express  a  truth  so  profoundly 
mysterious.  For  we  must  not  think  of  any  essential  transforma- 
tion of  the  Word  into  flesh  of  such  sort  as  would  convert  Deity 
into  humanity,  though  it  may  be  admissible  to  suppose  that  the 
divinity  subjected  itself,  under  some  law  unknown  to  us,  to  the 
conditions  of  human  flesh.  The  conditions  and  relations  of  this 
union  between  God  and  man  are  but  partially  revealed  in  the 
Scriptures  and  have  never  been  fathomed  by  any  human  research. 
It  seems  safe  to  assume,  because  apparently  revealed  in  Scripture, 
that  this  incarnation  ("the  Word  became  flesh")  was  the  union 
of  the  divine  Logos  with  a  whole  man;  not  to  a  human  body  only 
with  no  human  soul;  nor  to  the  human  soul  only  with  no  human 
body  save  in  appearance  or  semblance ;  but  the  real  divinity  was 
united  under  laws  and  conditions  not  fully  known  to  us,  with  a 
real  and  complete  man. There  is  no  occasion  to  say — with  hu- 
manity in  the  abstract,  for  suoh  a  conception  only  helps  toward 
mysticism  and  obscurity — We  may  also  assume  as  the  result  of 
this  union  on  the  negative  side,  that  the  man  Jesus  became  thereliy 
none  the  less  a  man — none  the  less  subject  to  the  incidents  of  nor- 
mal humanity — the  frailties,  infirmities,  fatigues,  and  suiferings, 
the  demands  for  nutrition,  sleep,  and  rest ;  the  exposure  to  temp- 
tation, at  least  from  the  devil  if  not  from  the  world  and  the  flesh. — 
On  the  other  hand,  the  divine  Logos  did  not  become  in  any  re- 
spect less  than  divine  by  reason  of  this  union.  It  did  involve  an 
obscuring  of  his  divine  glory,  an  emptying  of  himself  as  to  this 
glory,  as  Paul  puts  it  (Phil.  2 :  7),  yet  manifestly  only  in  the  sense  of 
what  was  apparent,  and  related  to  the  form  rather  than  the  reality. 

It  is  also  clear  that  this  union  ensured  a  most  intimate  sympa- 
thy between  the  human  and  the  divine  in  the  person  of  Jesus,  and 
indirectly  a  marvelous  sympathy  between  Jesus  and  all  his  believ- 
ing people  toward  whom  he  evermore  bears  himself  as  their  El- 
der Brother — a  relation  which  could  not  have  been  wdiat  it  now  is 
withoutthe  incarnation. Of  its  great  and  precious  results  bear- 
ing upon  the  value  of  his  atoning  death,  and  of  his  mediation,  ever 
living  before  the  Father's  throne ;  also  upon  the  exaltation  of  his 
accepted  brethren  gathered  home  to  the  "many  mansions"  he 
has  himself  provided  for  them — it  is  not  in  place  here  to  speak. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I.  27 

"And  dwelt  among  us" — tabernacled,  or  dwelt  in  a  tent  among 
us,  as  the  (Jreek  word  denotes,  with  manifest  allusion  to  the  visi- 
ble glory  which,  under  the  old  economy,  dwelt  in  the  thick  dark- 
ness of  the  most  holy  place.  Yet  the  divine  glory  though  shaded 
was  not  entirely  obscured,  for  we  saw  some  forth-streamin,^  rays 
thereof — "the  glory  as  of  the  onlj--begotten  of  the  Father.'  In- 
terpreting to  us  the  moral  significance  of  this  word  "  glory,"  he 
says,  "  full  of  grace  and  truth  " — grace  in  the  sense  of  kindness, 
love,  favor  ;  and  "  truth  "  comprehensively  put  for  the  revelations 
he  was  evermore  making  of  God  and  of  human  duty. 

The  word."  only-l)egotten"  opens  new  questions,  specially  these 
two: — (a)  Does  it  refer  to  the  Logos — the  divine  nature  of  Christ; 
or  to  the  man  Jesus  as  born  of  the  virgin  Mary  ? (6)  If  its  ref- 
erence be  to  the  Logos,  then  we  have  the  further  question  :  Must 
the  epithet  be  taken  in  its  primary  sense,  involving  actual  birth 
into  existence,  and  implying  a  derived  and  created  being ;  or  in 
its  secondary  sense — one  best  beloved,  dearest  to  the  heart  ? 

As  to  this  epithet  "  only-begotten,"  *  the  history  of  its  N.  T. 
usage  is  briefly  this :  It  is  used  by  John  (1  :  14,  18,  and  3  :  16,  18, 
and  1  John  4  :  9),  and  by  Luke  (7  :  12,  and  8  :  42,  and  9  :  38 ;  also 
in  Heb.  11 :  17),  which  may  be  only  another  case  of  Luke's  usage. 

Only  John  applies  it  to  the  person  of  Christ. That  he  applies 

it  rather  to  the  divine  person  of  Christ  than  to  the  human  is 
strongly  indicated  in  each  case  by  the  context,  the  "glory" 
spoken  of  (v.  14)  being  manifestly  that  of  his  jji-e-existent  divine 
personality.  His  being  from  eternity  in  the  bosom  of  the  P'ather 
(v.  18)  sustains  the  same  reference.  God's  "giving  his  only  be- 
gotten Son"  (3  :  16)  naturally  suggests  the  Logos  rather  than  the 
man  Jesus.  So  also  in  1  John  4:9;  "In  this  was  manifested 
the  love  of  God  because  that  God  sent  his  only-begotten  Son  into 
the  world  that  we  might  live  through  him." 

{b.)  Assuming  then  its  special  reference  to  the  divine  Logos, 
must  we  give  the  word  its  jjrimary  sense — the  only  horn — exclud- 
ing all  other  sons,  yet  involving  the  normal  sense  of  bringing 
into  being;  or,  ruling  out  the  idea  of  derived  existence  as  incom- 
patible with  his  existing  from  eternity  and  with  his  being  really 
God — (the  very  point  which  John  affirmed  in  the  outset)  (1 :  1), — 
may  we  limit  its  meaning  to  the  secondary  sense,  viz,  best  be- 
loved ? 

This  secondary  sense  is  a  natural  one,  the  special  affection  felt 
by  the  parent  for  an  only  son  being  an  impulse  and  law  of  nature. 
It  is  moreover  favored  by  the  Hebrew  usage  of  their  correspond- 
ing word.f^ Yet  again,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  John  virtually 

foreclosed  this  primary  sense  of  the  epithet  when  he  first  intro- 
duced the  Logos,  affirming  that  he  existed  from  eternity  and  was 
truly  God,  it  seems  plain  that  he  could  not  gainsay  those  first 
solemn  declarations  by  using  the  word  "  only-begotten  "  in  a  sense 
which  involves  derived  existence. Finally,  the  secondary  sense 

*  Greek:  [lovoyzvrir;.  '\  "VTV 


28  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  I. 

— best  beloved — is  in  full  harmony  with  the  scope  of  the  pas- 
sages in  John,  e.  g.  "  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father;  "  "  God  so  loved 
the  world  that  he  gave  his  Son,"  though  most  dearly  loved,  etc. 

15.  John  bare  witness  of  him,  and  ci'ied,  saying,  This 
Avas  he  of  whom  I  spake,  He  that  cometh  after  me  is  pre- 
ferred before  me ;  for  he  was  before  me. 

The  Evangelist  now  adduces  the  testimony  of  John  the  Baptist, 
at  whose  feet  he  had  been  wont  to  sit.  Hence  the  vividness  of 
the  picture,  for  the  writer  well  remembered  how  the  Baptist  used 
to  stand  and  cry  aloud  to  the  gathered  multitudes.  When  he  saw 
Jesus  approaching  he  cried — This  is  he  of  whom  I  have  often 
spoken  as  soon  to  come.  Coming  after  me  in  point  of  time,  he 
becomes  before  me  in  dignity  and  greatness,  eclipses  me  with  his 
superior  glory,  for  (in  his  pre-existent  divine  nature)  he  existed 
before  me,  and  therefore  should  take  rank  indefinitely  above  me. 

The  reference  to  Christ's  pre-existent  divine  nature  in  the 

words,  "  for  he  was  before  me, '  *  seems  unquestionable.  The 
Baptist — last  of  the  Old  Testament  prophets,  and,  on  the  author- 
ity of  Jesus  himself  (Matt.  11  :  10,  11),  greatest  among  them  all — 
must  be  supposed  to  have  understood  the  pre-existence  of  the  ex- 
pected Messiah  not  less  clearly  than  Isaiah  (6  :  1,  and  40  :  3)  and 

J)aniel  (7:  13)  and  Malachi  (3:  1). Note  also  the  prophetic 

view  of  his  father  Zacharias  (Luke  1:  16,  17,  76),  who  manifestly 
saw  that  John  was  to  be  the  harbinger  of  the  Messiah  foretold  by 
Isaiah  and  Malachi. 

16.  And  of  his  fulhiess  have  all  we  received,  and  grace 
for  grace. 

The  best  textual  authorities  commence  this  verse  not  with 
"  and  "  [kai],  but  with  because  \_oti'],  indicating  it  as  continuing 
the  Evangelist's  own  words  and  closely  connected  with  v.  14;  v. 
15  being  a  parenthesis.  We  saw  the  glory  of  the  Divine  Word 
Avhen  he  appeared  among  us  in  human  flesh,  full  of  grace  and 
truth,  .  .  .  because  of  his  fullness  [of  grace  and  truth]  have  all 

we  Christian  believers  received. On  the  exact  sense   of  the 

words  "grace  upon  grace,"  the  best  commentators  differ;  some 
explaining  them  of  the  successive  installments  of  grace  given  to 
believers — grace  after  grace,  or  grace  upon  grace — constant  sup- 
plies to  meet  their  ever  recurring  wants :  while  others  would 
say — Christ  gives  to  his  people  grace  like  his  own,  corresponding 
in  its  nature  to  that  of  which  he  has  an  infinite  fiJlness.  The 
latter  construction  well  interprets  the  preposition  "  for"  [_anii}  ; 
is  in  harmony  with  the  drift  of  thought ;  and  evolves  a  most  pre- 
cious truth,  viz.,  that  Jesus  gives  to  his  people  of  the  same  grace 
of  which  he  has  such  fullness — thus  making  them  "  partakers  of 
his  holiness." 

*  'OTi   TZpUTur  jJOV  ?p'. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOIIX.— CHAP.  I.  29 

17.  For  the  law  was  given  by  Moses,  hut  grace  and  truth 
came  by  Jesus  Christ. 

The  gift  of  grace  through  Jesus  Christ  is  still  further  height- 
ened by  being  pLaeed  in  antitliesis  with  the  mission  and  work  of 
Moses.  Through  him  God  gave  the  law,  good  in  its  time  and 
place  ;  and  yet  it  was  followed  in  the  fullness  of  time  by  far  richer 

manifestations  of  divine  favor  and  of  glorious  truth. There  is 

no  occasion  to  push  this  contrast  to  such  an  extreme  as  to  make 
it  imply  that  no  grace  and  truth  were  revealed  thi'ough  Moses,  or 
that  no  law  came  through  Christ.  The  obvious  sense  is  the  true 
one; — the  burden  of  the  revelation  by  Moses  was  law;  the  full- 
ness of  Christ  came  in  the  line  of  grace  and  truth. 

18.  No  man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time;  the  only  begot- 
ten Son,  which  is  in  the  bo.toni  of  the  Father,  he  hath  de- 
clared him. 

The  statement — "No  man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time,"  will 
perhaps  seem  abrupt,  until  we  trace  the  mental  associations  which 
suggested  it.  Do  we  not  find  these  in  the  history  of  Moses,  where 
we  see  his  intense  desire  to  behold  the  face  of  God,  and  have  the 
response  of  the  Lord  which  granted  his  prayer,  subject  however 
to  large  limitations  (See  Ex.  o3 :  12-23).  No  man  during  all  the 
antecedent  ages  had  come  so  near  to  seeing  the  face  of  God,  yet 

the  history  shows  how  far  he  fell  short  of  it. Of  course  "to 

see  one's  face"  expresses  the  deepest  and  truest  possible  appre- 
hension of  real  character.  The  Psalmist  said  of  the  future  life — 
"I  shall  behold  thy  face  in  righteousness."  The  present  life  af- 
fords no  such  experience. "Hearing  and  learning"  (John  6: 

45,  46)  indicate  a  lower  gi'ade  of  Isnowledge,  made  possible  to  men 
on  earth  through  the  teaching  Spirit;  but  the  perfect  knowledge 
expressed  by  seeing,  none  save  the  Son  has  enjoyed,  lie  whose 
relations  to  the  Father  were  most  endearing  and  his  communion 
altogether  perfect  ["in  the  bosom  of  the  Father"],  having  con- 
sequently known  the  Father  perfectly,  was  competent  to  "declare 
him  " — to  set  foi'th  with  all  clearness,  fullness  and  certainty,  the 
deepest  things  of  God. 

19.  And  this  is  the  record  of  John,  when  the  Jews  sent 
priests  and  Levites  from  Jerusalem  to  ask  him.  Who  art  thou  ? 

20.  And  he  confessed,  and  denied  not ;  but  confessed,  I 
am  not  the  Christ. 

21.  And  they  asked  him.  What  then?  Art  thou  Ellas? 
And  he  saith,  I  am  not.  Art  thou  that  Prophet  ?  And  he 
answered.  No. 

22.  Then  said  they  unto  him.  Who  art  thou?  that  Ave 
may  give  an  answer  to  them  that  sent  us.  What  sayest 
thou  of  thyself? 


30  GOSPEL  OF  JOHxV.— CHAP.  I. 

23.  He  said,  I  am  the  voice  of  one  crying  in  the  wilder- 
ness, Make  straight  the  way  of  the  Lord,  as  said  the  prophet 
Esaias. 

This  testimony  of  John  the  Baptist  to  himself  and  to  Jesus 
may  be  regarded  as  official,  given  in  reply  to  a  special  delegation, 

sent  to  him  while  prosecuting  his  work. Jerusalem  was  the 

religious  center  of  the  nation.  The  Sanhedrim — the  constituted 
religious  authorities  of  the  whole  people — resided,  or  at  least  held 
their  sessions,  there.  In  the  great  movement  produced  by  John's 
preaching,  when  there  "  went  out  to  him  Jerusalem  and  all  Judea  " 
(Matt.  3:  5),  and  even  "  many  of  the  Pharisees  and  of  the  Sad- 
ducces"  (Matt.  3:  7),  the  Sanhedrim  could  not  be  unaffected. 
Their  official  responsibilities  and  probably  too  their  rational  curi- 
osity would  suggest  the  deputation  here  spoken  of  Apparently, 
there  is  no  occasion  to  impute  other  than  laudable  motives  in 
sending  this  embassy.  It  was  both  proper  in  itself  and  impor- 
tant to  themselves  and  to  the  whole  people  that  they  should  know 
who  this  great  preacher  might  be.  Was  lie  the  nation's  long  ex- 
pected Messiah?  This  was  naturally  the  first  and  main  question. 
John  answered  it  promptly  and  squarely  in  the  negative.  Was 
he  Elijah?  *  The  projihecy  of  Malachi  (4  :  5)  had  raised  in  some 
minds  the  expectation  that  Elijah  Avould  reappear  from  heaven. 
The  ti'ue  interpretation  had  been  given  by  Zacharias,  the  father 
of  John : — "He  shall  go  before  him  [Jesus]  in  the  sjJirit  and 
jpott'e?' of  Elias  "  (Luke  1 :  17).  That  the  prophetic  eye  of  Ma- 
lachi rested  upon  this  John  was  repeatedly  affirmed  by  Jesus 
himself  (Matt.  11:  14  and  17;  10-13)  When  John  answered 
the  second  question — "Art  thou  Elias  ?"  with  an  explicit  denial, 
it  must  be  assumed  that  he  saw  the  sense  in  which  they  put  the 
question  and  answered  definitely  io  that  sense  of  it — No ;  1  am  not 
Elias,  literally  returned  from  heaven.  We  need  not  suppose  that 
John  denied  what  his  father  had  said,  viz,  that  this  son  would  go 
before  Jesus,  a  second  Elijah  in  his  spirit  and  power.  As  to  its 
words  their  question  might  have  either  of  these  two  senses.  John 
answered  to  the  sense  which  he  saw  was  in  their  thought — as  he 
ought  honestly  to  do. 

Their  next  question — "Art  thou  that  prophet?"  is  supposed  by 
most  critics  to  refer  to  the  prophecy  given  through  Moses  (Deut. 
18  :  15,  18) :  "  The  Lord  thy  God  shall  raise  up  unto  thee  a  Proph- 
et from  the  midst  of  thee  like  unto  me ;  unto  him  shall  ye  heark- 
en," etc. These  questions  repeated  in  various  forms  show  that 

they  were  in  earnest  to  ascertain  whether  this  wonderful  man 
had  been  at  all  fore-indicated  in  their  OAvn  prophetic  scriptures. 
It  was  reasonable  that  they  should  push  this  great  inquiry.  John 
seems  to  have  accepted  their  questioning  kindly.  With  no  hesi- 
tation he  proceeded  to  give  them  the  true  and  full  answer  :  "  I  am 
the  voice  of  one  crying  in  the  wilderness,  Make  straight  the  way 

*  "Elias"  is  the  Greek  form  of  tliis  Hebrew  name. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CILVr.  1.  31 

of  the  Lord."  Ye  will  find  the  prediction  of  this  coming  "  voice  " 
in  the  prophet  Isaiah  (40  :  3).  Matthew  (3  :  3)  and  Luke  (3  :  4) 
make  the  same  explicit  identification;  while  Mark  (1 :  2)  simply 
saj's  that  this  is  "  written  in  the  prophets."  There  is  good  reason 
to  suppose  that  Malachi  (3 :  1,  and  4  :  5,  6)  followed  the  words  of 
Isaiah  and  reaflirmed  their  application  to  the  great  forerunner  of 
the  JNIessiah. 

Were  the  men  of  this  delegation  impressed  by  this  straight- 
forward, honest  testimony  to  the  coming  Messiah  and  ready  to  im- 
plore this  Avitness  to  lead  them  at  once  to  their  nation's  great  Re- 
deemer? Alas!  they  were  Pharisees,  and  their  notions  of  great- 
ness and  glory  were  by  no  means  met  in  the  preaching,  the  spirit, 
the  general  appearance  and  bearing  of  this  bold  reprover  of 
their  sin. 

24.  And  tliey  wliich  w'ere  sent  were  of  the  Pharisees. 

25.  And  they  asked  him,  and  said  unto  him,  Why  bap- 
tizest  thou  then,  if  thou  be  not  that  Christ,  nor  Elias,  neither 
that  Prophet? 

The  Evangelist  John  suggests  it  as  a  significant  fiict  that  the  men 
sent  on  this  embassy  were  Pharisees ;  for  none  but  they  would  have 
put  and  pressed  the  question — AVhy  then  dost  thou  baptize  if  thou 
art  not  the  Christ,  nor  Elias,  nor  "  that  prophet?  "  The  Pharisees 
were  professionally  and  Avith  full  heart  in  charge  over  the  whole 

domain  of  religious  rites  and  ceremonial  institutions. Their 

question  implies  that  they  had  some  notions  about  baptism,  its  sig- 
nificance, and  the  authority  to  administer  it;  for  they  manifestly 
assume  that  either  Christ,  Elias,  or  "that  prophet"  might  with 
propriety  baptize — but  no  one  of  lower  dignity  than  theirs. 

Inquiring  for  the  actual  or  supposable  ideas  of  the  Pharisees  in 
regard  to  baptism,  we  find  (1.)  That  the  Mosaic  ceremonial  system 
abounded  in  ablutions,  washings,  (in  the  words  of  the  writer  to  the 
Hebrews,  "stood  in  diverse  baptisms" — Eng.  "washings,")  all 
built  on  the  analogy  between  physical  cleanness  and  moral  purity. 
No  men  could  be  more  conversant  and  familiar  with  these  tljings 

than  the  Pharisees. (2.)  In  their  own  scriptures  there  occurred 

numerous  references  to  the  moral  cleansing  to  be  wrought  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,  symbolically  indicated  by  washing,  sprinkling  and 
various  references  to  fountains  of  water.  We  can  see  now  that 
those  passages  in  the  Old  Testament  looked  forward  to  the  great 
moral  work  of  the  divine  Spirit  and  bore  within  them  the  true  sig- 
nificance of  baptism.     But  how  thoroughly  the  Pharisees  of  John's 

time  understood  those  passages  can  not  be  fully  known. (3.) 

That  proselytes  from  the  Gentiles  to  Judaism  were  admitted  by 
baptism  is  well  attested  by  Jewish  authorities,  e.  g.  Maimonides 
and  by  the  Jerusalem  Talmud  and  the  Babylonian.  [See  Smith's 
Bible  Dictionary  on  "Baptism."] 

With  these  facts  before  us,  we  may  put  the  case  thus  :  (a.)  Bap- 
tism with  water  implied  a  confession  of  moral  impurity  and  of  the 


32  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I. 

need  of  moral  cleansing. (h.)  It  involved  in  the  subject  of  bap- 
tism the  promise  and  covenant  of  a  better  life,  coupled  apparently 

with  a  measure  of  faith  in  gracious  help  from  God. (c.)  Hence 

it  would  be  legitimate  for  a  great  reformer,  such  as  their  expected 
Messiah,  or  Elias  or  "  that  Prophet,"  to  baptize  those  who  became 
his  disciples,  promising  to  follow  him  in  the  ways  of  a  holy  life. 
The  Jews  of  that  age  expected  their  INIessiah  to  institute  a  king- 
dom, and  apparently  did  not  object  to  his  making  baptism  its  rite 
of  initiation.  In  the  sense  in  which  Paul  says  the  Hebrew  nation 
were  "  all  baptized  unto  Moses  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  sea  "  (1  Cor. 
10:  2),  all  the  followers  of  a  great  prophet,  equal  to  or  like  unto 
Moses,  might  pledge  themselves  by  baptism  to  become  his  disciples 
and  to  follow  him  in  a  new  moral  life. 

26.  John  answered  them,  saying,  I  baptize  with  water: 
but  there  stancleth  one  among  you,  whom  ye  know  not. 

27.  He  it  is,  who  coming  after  me  is  preferred  before  me, 
■whose  shoe's  latchet  I  am  not  w^orthy  to  unloose. 

T  understand  John's  answer  thus:  On  your  own  principles  it  is 
proper  for  me  to  baptize.  For  though  I  am  not  myself  the  Christ, 
yet  I  am  only  a  few  days  before  him,  laboring  to  prepare  the  people 
to  welcome  his  advent  and  come  penitently  to  his  feet.  Indeed,  he 
is  already  standing  among  you,  though  ye  know  him  not. More- 
over I  baptize  with  water  only  :  he,  greater  far  in  moral  power  than 
I,  will  baptize  with  the  Holy  Ghost  (v.  33).  On  your  own  prin- 
ciples I  am  authorized  to  call  the  people  to  repentance,  to  take 
their  pledge  to  accept  the  coming  Messiah  already  so  very  near  at 
hand,  and  to  put  this  pledge  in  the  expressive  form  of  baptism  by 
water.  Even  if  there  could  be  some  question  as  to  the  propriety 
of  such  baptism  when  the  Messiah's  coming  was  remote,  there  can 

be  none  now  that  he  is  just  at  hand. Moreover  the  baptism 

which  I  administer  makes  only  the  least  possible  account  of  their 
following  me  as  their  spiritual  leader.  It  is  the  great  and  far  more 
glorious  Personage  who  comes  after  me  to  whom  I  direct  every  eye. 
As  to  myself  I  am  not  even  worthy  to  untie  his  shoes.  [This  was 
deemed  of  all  service  most  menial.] 

28.  These  things  Avere  done  in  Bethabara  beyond  Jordan, 
where  John  was  baptizing. 

On  the  highest  textual  authority,  the  location  of  this  scene  is  not 
Bethabara,  but  Bethany;  yet  not  the  Bethany  on  the  Mount  of 
Olives,  but  (to  distinguish  this  from  that)  a  place  beyond  the  river 
Jordan.  The  place  was  doubtless  small,  obscure,  in  that  wilder- 
ness region  where  John  was  preaching  and  baptizing.  It  seems 
to  have  sunk  after  this  into  oblivion.  Origen,  th-ree  hundred  years 
later,  could  find  no  trace  of  the  name  Bethany,  arid  therefore  fixed 
upon  Bethabara  as  the  place — whence  came  (as  is  supposed)  tlie 
change  in  some  more  recent  copies  of  the  text. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CILVr.  I.  33 

29.  The  next  day  John  seeth  Jesus  coming  unto  him,  and 
saith,  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God,  which  takcth  away  the  siu 
of  the  Avorld ! 

The  day  following  the  interview  with  the  priests  and  Levites 
from  Jerusalem,  John  had  an  opportunity  to  identify  Jesus  and 
introduce  him  publicly  to  his  own  disciples.  Seeing  Jesus  ap- 
proaching, he  cried  aloud;  "  Bcliold  the  Lamb  of  God  who  taketh 
away  the  sin  of  the  world."  The  Lamb  of  God,  i.  e.  of  his  own 
providing,  whose  chief  mission  in  coming  to  earth  from  heaven  is 
to  "  take  away  the  sin  of  the  world."  He  does  not  say.  Behold  the 
world's  Great  Teacher;  nor  this — Behold  Him  whose  spotless  ex- 
ample is  to  enlighten  and  regenerate  the  race;  nor  even  this — 
Behold  your  long  expected  King,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  as  ye 
have  often  heard  from  me,  is  even  now  at  hand.  Any  one  of  these 
points  he  might  have  put  forward  into  the  foreground  of  this  first 
announcement;  but,  passing  them  all,  he  seizes  upon  anothei",  by 
for  more  central,  prominent  and  comprehensive  than  either  or  all 
of  these  and  announces  him  as  the  sacrificial  Lamb  who  takes  upon 
himself  and  bears  away  the  sin  of  the  world. 

The  definite  reference  in  the  words  "  tJie  Lamb  " — the  well 
known,  fore-indicated  Lamb,  raises  the  qviestion.  To  what  in  par- 
ticular does  John  refer  ?  Is  it  to  the  Lamb  of  the  Passover  as 
typifying  Christ  and  fulfilled  in  him  ?  Or  is  it  the  daily  morn- 
ing and  evening  sacrifice ;  or  may  it  refer  to  any  one  of  the  nu- 
merous sin  or  trespass  ofierings  prescribed  in  the  Mosaic  ritual? 

We  are  relieved  fi-om  discussing  these  supposable  references 

by  the  entirely  satisfoctory  evidence  that  John  has  his  eye  upon 
the  Lamb  spoken  of  in  Isa.  51 :  7 — that  Great  Sufferer  Avho  was 
borne  "  as  a  lamb  to  the  slaughter."  For  we  know  that  John  the 
Baptist  was  familiar  with  the  book  of  Isaiah;  he  found  his  own 
mission  and  work  foretold  there  as  "  the  voice  of  one  crying  in 
the  wilderness."  There  also  he  found  the  great,  chief  work  of 
the  Messiah — his  specially  characteristic  work — delineated  in  clear- 
est outline  as  hcAvho  "  bore  our  griefs;  "  was  "wounded  for  our 
transgressions;"  upon  whom  the  Lord  "laid  the  iniquity  of  us 
all;  "  who  was  borne  "as  a  Lamb  to  the  slaughter,"  "dumb  as  a 
sheep  before  her  shearers,"  never  opening  his  mouth  in  self-vin- 
dication; who,  in  fine,  "bore  the  sins  of  many  and  made  inter- 
cession for  the  transgressors."  This  wonderfully  graphic  por- 
trayal of  the  world's  Great  SuSerer  and  Sacrifice  was  most  mani- 
festly before  the  eye  of  John  the  Baptist,  supplying  to  him  those 
pregnant  words  with  which  he  at  once  described  and  hailed  the 
Coming  One  at  this  eventful  hour,  and  introduced  him  to  a  wait- 
ing and  expectant  world. 

As  to  the  central,  pivotal  word  in  this  announcement — "taking 
away,"  *  critics  find  in  it  two  possible  and  apparently  co-ordinate 
ideas:  (a)  Taking  upon  one's  self  to  bear:  (b)  Bearing  away,  re- 

*  Greek,  aipuv. 


34  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I. 

moving  and  taking  out  of  the  way ;  the  latter,  however,  rather  than 
the  former  being  the  most  direct,  natural,  and  necessary  sense. 
But  nothing  forbids  that  Ave  unite  these  two  ideas  in  the  one  word, 
Avith  the  comprehensive  result — Who  takes  upon  himself  to  bear 
and  so  does  hear  aioay  the  sin  of  the  world. — Thus  John  puts 
boldly  in  the  foreground  the  sacrificial,  atoning  work  of  Jesus, 
the  nation's  Messiah. 

If  the  question  be  raised  whether  "taking  aAvay  the  sin  of  the 
world"  must  not  insure  the  salvation  of  the  whole  race,  let  these 
points  of  explanation  and  reply,  briefly  put,  be  considered,  viz : — 
(1.)  That  in  an  announcement  so  concise  as  this,  it  Avere  out  of 
place  to  notice  the  limitations  and  conditions  of  this  sah^ation ; 
and  (2.)  That  there  is  a  vital  sense  in  Avliich  Christ's  atoning  Avork 
Avas /or  the  ivorld. 

The  EA'angelist  John  wrote  (1  John  2 :  2),  "  He  is  the  propitiation 
f(n'  our  sins,  and  not  for  ours  only,  but  also  for  the  sins  of  the 
Avhole  Avorld;  "  also,  "We  ha\'eseen  and  do  testify  that  the  Father 
sent  the  Son  to  be  the  Savior  of  the  Avorld  "  (1  John  4:  14);  and 
Jesus  himself  said — "And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up,  Avill  draAV  all  men 
unto  me"  (John  12:  32).  Plainly  Christ's  death  for  sinners 
}nade  salvation  possible  for  all  the  world.  It  brought  the  race 
out  from  a  condition  of  universal  condemnation  into  one  Avhere 
pardon  Avas  provided  for  and  proffered  to  all.  No  more  or  other 
atoning  blood  was  needful  for  the  salvation  of  the  Avide  Avorld  of 
sinners.  God  had  so  lo\-ed  the  Avorld  that  he  gaA'e  his  Son  to  die 
for  it.  What  each  sinner  must  do  for  himself  in  order  to  appro- 
priate this  salvation  and  make  it  his  own,  it  Avere  not  needful  that 
John  should  include  in  this  most  brief  announcement.  That  was 
left  to  be  taught  elsewhere.  How  needlessly,  and  sadly,  and  guilt- 
fully  many  Avould  fail  of  this  salvation  after  it  had  been  most  ad- 
equately provided  and  most  sincerely  and  warmly  proffered,  there 
Avas  no  need  to  say  in  this  first  proclamation  by  Christ's  great 
Harbinger. 

To  those  who  have  made  themseh'es  somewhat  familiar  Avith 
the  fifty-third  chapter  of  Isaiah  and  have  studied  the  wonderful 
Personage  described  so  graphically  there ;  who  have  lingered  (as 
many  have)  OA'er  that  portrayal  of  thcAvorld's  great,  meek,  yet  glo- 
rious Sufferer ;  who  have  seen  the  very  marrow  of  the  whole  Bi- 
ble compressed  into  those  fcAV  telling  words,  it  must  seem  pecu- 
liarly felicitous  that  John  the  Baptist  should  seize  the  central 
idea  of  that  chapter,  and  apply  it  to  Jesus  of  Nazareth  to  identify 
him  as  the  Messiah  then  already  come.  We  might  search  the 
Bible  through  and  through  in  vain  for  better  Avords  than  those. 
If  salvation  for  our  race  is  through  atoning  blood,  then  these  are 
of  all  possible  words  the  most  fitting  to  set  forth  a  Savior  slain. 
If  life  for  the  saved  comes  through  the  death  of  their  Savior,  then 
he  can  haA'e  no  fitter  description  than  this — "The  Lamb  of  God 
who  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world."  If  it  Avere  important 
that  some  great  prophet  should  announce  his  coming  into  the 
world  and  his  appearing  before  men  as  the  world's  ]\Iessiah,  and 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I.  35 

Uien  if  it  were  also  important  that  his  announcement  should  put 
the  central  idea  of  his  work  in  most  grajihic  and  unmistakable 
terms,  then  surely  the  end  to  be  sought  is  well  attained  in  these 
few  but  most  forcible  and  expressive  words. 

30.  This  is  lie  of  whom  I  said,  After  me  cometh  a  man 
which  is  preferred  before  me ;  for  he  was  before  me. 

"  Of  whom  I  said  " — as  in  vs.  15,  27.  These  are  the  very  Avords 
in  which  his  great  testimony  respecting  Jesus  as  one  about  to 
come  was  usually  expressed. 

31.  And  I  knew  him  not :  but  that  he  should  be  made 
manifest  to  Israel,  therefore  am  I  come  baptizing  with  water. 

32.  And  John  bare  record,  saying,  I  saw  the  Spirit  de- 
scending from  heaven  like  a  dove,  and  it  abode  upon  him. 

33.  And  I  knew  him  not :  but  he  that  sent  me  to  baptize 
with  water,  the  same  said  unto  me.  Upon  whom  thou  shalt 
see  the  Spirit  descending,  and  remaining  on  him,  the  same 
is  he  which  baptizeth  with  the  Holy  Ghost. 

34:.  And  I  saw,  and  bare  record  that  this  is  the  Son  of 
God. 

Note  here  how  emphatically  the  Baptist  declares,  twice  re- 
jieated :  "  I  knew  him  not " — till  at  his  baptism  he  was  pointed 
out,  according  to  a  prophetic  pre-iutimation,  by  the  visiljle  descent 

of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  form  as  a  dove,  resting  u^ion  him. But 

the  narrative  given  by  JMatthew  seems  to  im|i]y  that  when  Jesus 
came  from  Galilee  to  John  to  request  baptism,  John  already  knew 
him — it  being  there  said  that  "John  forbade  him,  saying,  I  have 
need  to  be  baptized  of  thee,  and  comest  thou  to  me  ?  "  To  which 
Jesus  replied,  "  Suffer  it  to  be  so  now;  for  thus  it  becometh  us  to 
fulfill  all  righteousness."  "  Then  he  suffered  him."  This  conversa- 
tion manifestly  preceded  the  baptism  itself,  and  seems  to  show 
that  John  recognized  Jesus  as  so  much  greater  than  himself  that 
it  was  incongruous  and  inappropriate  for  himself  to  baptize  him. 

The  explanation  of  this  apparent  contradiction  turns  upon 
knowing  Christ  in  two  different  senses,  a  lower  and  a  higher.  In 
the  lower  sense  John  recognized  Jesus  before  the  scenes  of  his 
baptism,  for  he  had  heard  of  him ;  possibly  had  seen  him,  and 
had  known  many  things  about  him.  But  the  higher  and  more 
certain  knowledge,  the  definite  and  unmistakable  certification 
from  heaven,  -Tohn  had  not  until  that  visible  descent  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  upon  him — the  supernatural  testimony  from  God  himself. 
In  view  of  this  he  might  well  say,  I  did  not  knoiv  him  before.  I 
had  no  knowledge  of  him  worthy  of  the  name — none  equal  to 
the  emergency — no  such  positive  certainty  as  I  needed  to  have 
that  Jesus  was  God's  own  Son,  indorsed  from  the  very  heavens  by 

the  testimony  of  God  himself Observe,  moreover,  that  it  was 

not  for  John  s  personal  benefit  alone  that  he  needed  this  emphatic 
ideutific;ition  of  Jesus  as  the  Messiah.     It  was  rather  that  this 


36  GOSPEL  OF  JOHX.— CIIAr.  I. 

Messiah  "  might  he  made  manifest  to  Israel."  For  the  sake  of 
the  whole  people  this  testimony  from  the  visible  heavens  was  ap- 
propriate, not  to  say  demanded. 

With  beautiful  fitness  it  was  the  Spirit  descending  visibly  and 
remaining  upon  him  that  pointed  him  out  as  he  Avho  should  "  bap- 
tize with  the  Holy  Ghost."  He  to  whom  the  Spirit  was  given 
"not  by  measure  "  (John  3  :  34),  but  in  fullness  above  measure, 
Avas  endowed  Avith  the  prerogative  of  imparting  the  Spirit  in 
blessed  fullness  to  his  people. 

Note  also  here  the  words  in  which  John  bore  his  testimony  to 
Jesus:  "I  saw  and  bare  record  that  this  is  the  Son  of  God." 
Apparently  this  Sonship  looks  towai-d  the  incarnation,  the  words 
being  used  in  the  same  sense  as  in  Luke  1  :  35  :  "Therefore  also 
that  holy  thing  which  shall  be  born  of  thee  shall  be  called  The  Son 
of  God."  The  identification  of  Jesus  before  the  Jewish  nation 
should  natui'ally  contemplate  his  visible  humanity  rather  than  hia 
pre-existent  divinity.  Their  eyes  saw  the  human  form,  and  the 
thing  they  needed  to  know  of  him  was  that  he  was  the  incarna- 
ted Son  of  God. 

35.  Again  the  next  day  after,  John  stood,  and  two  of 
his  disciples ; 

36.  And  looking  upon  Jesus  as  he  walked,  he  saith.  Be- 
hold the  Lamb  of  God  ! 

37.  And  the  two  disciples  heard  him  speak,  and  they  fol- 
low^ed  Jesus. 

38.  Then  Jesus  turned,  and  saw  them  following,  and  saith 
unto  them,  "W^hat  seek  ye?  They  said  unto  him,  Rabbi, 
(which  is  to  say,  being  interpreted.  Master,)  where  dwellest 
thou? 

39.  He  saith  unto  them,  Come  and  see.  They  came  and 
saw  where  he  dwelt,  and  abode  with  him  that  day  :  for  it  Avas 
about  the  tenth  hour. 

40.  One  of  the  two  Avhich  heard  John  speak,  and  folloAved 
him,  was  AndreAV,  Simon  Peter's  brother. 

The  notices  of  time  in  the  narrative  portion  of  this  chapter 
seem  remarkable,  especially  Avlieu  we  consider  the  lapse  of  years 
(perhaps  forty)  between  the  events  themselves  and  the  writing  of 
this  record.  The  transactions  of  three  successive  days  are 
mapped  out  (vs.  29-34;  35-42  ;  43-51).  Eventful  days  were  these 
in  the  life-history  of  the  E\'angelist  John.  He  could  not  forget 
them. John  the  Baptist  Avas  standing  with  tAvo  of  his  disci- 
ples; one  said  (v.  40)  to  be  Andrew;  the  other  Ave  must  assume 
to  haA'e  been  the  Evangelist  John,  who  ncA'er  gives  his  own  name. 
The  Baptist,  looking  upon  Jesus  as  he  was  walking  about  to  and 
fro,*  said  again:    "Behold  the  Lamb   of   God!" — omitting  the 

■••■  Gr.  TrcpiTTaToiTTi, 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I.  37 

words  "  who  taketli  away  the  sin  of  the  world,"  probahly  because 
they  had  been  used  before  and  would  be  suggested  by  the  word 

"  Lamb." The  remark  was  a  hint  to  those  two  disciples  to  follow 

him.  They  at  once  understood  and  accepted  it.  Jesus  saw  them  fol- 
lowing ;  anticipated  their  purpose,  and,  as  he  is  Avont  to  do,  met  it 
promptly  and  most  kindly:  "  What  seek  ye?" — My  master,  said 
they  each ;  let  me  sit  at  thy  feet  and  learn  more  of  thee.  Where 
is  thy  home  that  we  may  have  leisure  with  thee?  Jesus  said. 
Come  and  see.  Two  more  hours  of  the  day  remained.  They 
went  and  abode  with  him  through  those  hallowed  hours. 

41.  He  first  findetli  his  own  brother  Shiion,  and  saith 
unto  him,  We  have  fouud  the  Messias,  which  is,  being  in- 
terpreted, the  Christ. 

42.  And  he  brought  him  to  Jesus.  And  when  Jesus  be- 
held him,  he  said,  Thou  art  Simon  the  son  of  Jona :  thou 
shalt  be  called  Cephas,  which  is  by  interpretation,  A  stone. 

Those  two  hours  of  Andrew  with  Jesus  had  fixed  his  heart 
upon  this  new  Master.  What  should  he  do  next  but  find  his  own 
brother  Simon  to  tell  him  the  great  discovery — We  have  found  the 
Messiah  ;  come  at  once  and  see  him  for  yourself     You  too  must 

learn  to  know  and  love  him. He  brought  him  to  Jesus.     Jesus 

saw  in  an  instant  all  that  Peter  was  to  become  in  his  group  of 
disciples  and  in  his  founding  of  the  new  kingdom.  Thou  hast 
been  called  Simon;  thou  shalt  have  the  surname  of  Cephas 
[Syriac]  or  Petros  [Greek] — both  words  having  the  same  signifi- 
cance— a    stone    or    rock. Such   a   prophetic   foreshadowing 

ought  to  have  impressed  Simon,  not  so  much  with  a  sense  of  his 
importance  and  dignity  as  of  his  great  and  delicate  responsibility. 

The  reader  may  also  note  that  the  author's  explanation  of  the 
meaning  of  such  words  as  "  Messiah"  and  "Cephas"  shows  that 
he  wrote  originally  for  Gentile  and  not  Jewish  readers.  No 
Jews  of  that  age  could  need  such  interpretations. 

43.  The  day  following  Jesus  would  go  forth  into  Gali- 
lee, and  findeth  Philip,  and  saith  unto  him.  Follow  me. 

44.  Now  Philip  was  of  Bethsaida,  the  city  of  Andrew  and 
Peter. 

Jesus,  about  to  leave  the  field  of  the  Baptist's  preaching  and 
labors,  and  go  back  to  his  own  home  in  Galilee,  improved  his  op- 
portunity to  gather  about  him  his  chosen  twelve.  The  first  se- 
lected   members  of    the   apostolic   group  were  taken    from   the 

school  of  John  the  Baptist — -their  preparatory  school. Philip 

being  a  townsman  of  Andrew  and  Peter,  seems  to  have  been 
drawn  to  Jesus  by  their  influence. 

45.  Philip  findeth  Nathanael,  and  saith  unto  him.  We 
have  fouud  him,  of  Avhom  jMoses  in  the  law,  and  the  proph- 
ets, did  write,  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  son  of  Jose^ih. 


38  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I. 

Philip  had  at  least  one  personal  friend — Nathanael;  earnest 
and  true-hearted.  He  forthwith  seeks  him  to  tell  him  the  joyful 
news — "We"  (several  of  us)  "have  found  that  Avonderful  JPer- 
sonage  of  Avhom  IMoses  in  the  law,  and  the  Prophets  in  their 
books,  did  write — Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  Son  of  Joseph.  Is  not 
this  good  news?" 

46.  And  Katlianael  said  unto  liim,  Can  there  any  ^ood  thing 
come  out  of  Nazareth?  Philip  saith  unto  him,  Come  and 
see. 

Nazareth  was  in  bad  repute.  Recalling  their  manner  of  treat- 
ing their  own  fellow-citizen  [Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  such]  as 
given  by  Luke  (4 :  16-30),  we  shall  cease  to  wonder  at  their  bad 
reputation.  Nathanael's  first  feeling  was  surprise  that  one  so 
great  and  good  could  possibly  originate  there.  Fortunately  for 
him,  this  slight  prejudice  readily  gave  way  before  appropriate 
evidence  to  tlie  contrary.  Philip  said — Come  and  see  what  you 
will  yourself  think  of  this  wonderful  man. 

47.  Jesus  saw  Nathanael  coming  to  him,  and  saith  of  him, 
Behold  an  Israelite  indeed,  in  whom  is  no  guile ! 

48.  Nathanael  saith  unto  him.  Whence  knowest  thou  me? 
Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him.  Before  that  Philip  called 
thee,  when  thou  wast  under  the  fig  tree,  I  saw  thee. 

Jesus  does  not  repel  Nathanael  for  that  slight  prejudice,  but 
promptly  and   openly  recognizes   his   guileless,  noble   character. 

How  earnest  thou  to  know  me?  said  Nathanael.     I  saw  thee 

under  the  fig-tree  before  Philip  called  thee. That  scene  under 

the  fig-tree  must  have  been  specially  suggestive,  with  some  more 
than  ordinary  bearing  upon  the  pending  issues  ;  we  can  not  other- 
wise account  for  this  allusion  to  it.  Taking  into  consideration 
the  fact  that  good  men  found  retirement  for  devout  meditation 
and  prayer  under  the  shade  and  in  the  seclusion  of  gardens  and 
their  fruit-bearing  trees,  Ave  may  very  naturally  infer  that  Na- 
thanael had  been  there  engaged  in  prayer,  the  Lord  moving  upon 
his  soul  to  prepare  him  for  this  revelation  of  Jesus  to  both  his 
eye  and  heart.  So  God  has  his  ways  of  preparing  his  people  for 
eventful  scenes. 

49.  Nathanael  answered  and  saith  unto  him,  Eabbi,  tliou 
art  the  Son  of  God  ;  thou  art  the  King  of  Israel. 

Sure  that  no  mortal  eye  could  have  seen  him  there  under  the 
fig-tree,  he  is  at  once  convinced  that  Jesus  saw  wath  more  than 
earthly  vision,  and  therefore  recognized  him  as  the  Great  Searcher 
of  hearts,  the  promised  Son  of  God,  the  predicted  King  of  Israel. 
If,  as  seems  probable,  Nathanael  had  been  a  disciple  of  John  the 
Baptist,  he  would  natui-ally  apply  to  the  Messiah  the  same  de- 
scriptive title — "Son  of  God" — which  his  master  had  given  (v. 
34).     The  other   name — "King   of    Israel" — came   legitimately 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I.  39 

from  the  Old  Testament  prophecies,  c.  g.  Zccli.  9  :  9,  and  Jer.  23 : 
5,  and  30  :  9,  and  IIos.  3 :  5. 

Who  was  this  Nathanael,  and  what  became  of  him  ?     Does  he 

appear  under  any  other   name  in  hater  gospel  history  ? Tlie 

opinion  is  held  somewhat  extensively  that  Nathanael  appears  in 
the  first  three  gospel  histories  under  the  name  Bartholomew,  and 
of  course  that  he  was  one  of  the  twelve.     The  main  reasons  fur 

this   opinion   are   these  : (1.)  It  was   not  uncommon  for  the 

same  man  to  have  two  or  more  names ;   e.  g.  Thomas,  Didymus  ; 

Simon,  Cephas,  Peter;  IMatthcw,  Levi,  etc. (2.)  As  Jesus  was 

at  that  time  making  up  the  twelve  known  as  his  disciples,  and  as 
Nathanael  appears  here  with  all  the  essential  qualifications,  it  is 

highly  probable  that  he  became  one. (3.)  John  nowhere  gives 

the  name  Bartholomew,  yet  once  elsewhere  (21  :  2)  gives  the 
name  Nathanael  as  of  Cana  in  Galilee  and  associated  with  the 

disciples. (4.)  But  Matthew  (10:  3),  Mark  (3  :  18),  and  Luke 

(6:  14)  give  the  name  Bartholomew;  never  the  name  Nathanael. 

(5.)  Noticeably  these  three   authors  in  their  respective  lists 

of  the  twelve  place  Bartholomew  immediately  after  Philip,  ^^re- 
cisely  where  we  should  expect  to  find  Nathanael. The  com- 
bined force  of  all  these  considerations  amounts  to  strong  pre- 
sumptive evidence  for  the  identity  of  Nathanael  and  Bartholo- 
mew. 

50.  Jesus  an.swered  and  said  unto  liim,  Because  I  said 
unto  thee,  I  saw  thee  under  the  fig  tree,  believest  thou  ? 
thou  shalt  see  greater  things  than  these. 

51.  And  he  saith  unto  him.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto 
you,  Hereafter  ye  shall  see  heaven  open,  and  the  angels  of 
God  ascending  and  descending  upon  the  Son  of  man. 

Commending  his  faith,  Jesus  promises  that  he  shall  see  yet 
greater  things,  and  proceeds  (v.  51)  to  say  what  they  should  be. 

The  best  authorities  omit  the  word  for  "  hereafter,"  leaving 

it  "  Ye  shall  see,"  etc. The  just  interpretation  of  the  words — 

"  Ye  shall  see  heaven  open,  and  the  angels  of  God  ascending 
and  descending  upon  the  Son  of  man,"  must  assume  a  reference 
to  the  revelations  of  God  made  to  Jacob  in  vision  at  Bethel. 
The  import  therefore  should  be  essentially  this: — God  coming 
very  near  in  most  impressive  manifestations ;  supernatural  works 
not  infrequent;  angels  coming  and  going  as  if  a  highway  Averc 
opened  and  often  traversed  by  angelic  feet.  If  the  vision  at  Bethel 
was  verified  in  a  series  of  answering  facts  throughout  Jacob's  life 
— double  camps  of  angels  at  Mahanaim  ;  the  angel  of  the  cove- 
nant wrestling  with  him  at  Peniel ;  manifest  providences  of  God 
taking  away  his  Joseph,  but  in  due  time  restoring  him  again, 
a  savior  to  Israel ;  how  much  more  abundantly  was  heaven  opened 
over  the  incarnate  Son  of  man — angels  coming  down  to  minister 
to  him  after  his  great  temptation,  in  the  scenes  of  Gethsemane, 
and  at  the  sepulchcr.     These  demonstrations  of  a  present  God 


40  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I. 

looking  out  as  from  an  open  heaven  upon  the  earthly  trials  and 
■work  of  his  incarnate  Son,  should  certainly  sufiice  to  confirm  the 
faith  of  his  trusting  disciples.  The  earthly  life  of  the  incarnate 
Son  of  God  could  by  no  means  lack  such  testimonials  from  the 
heavens  above.  Ou  every  princijale  of  reason  -we  should  expect 
them. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  Jesus  speaks  of  himself  here  as  "  the 
Son  of  man,"  while  in  this  chapter  John  the  Baptist  (v.  34)  and 
Nathanael  (v.  49)  concur  in  giving  him  the  title — "Son  of  God." 
Why  this  diversity ?  Why  does  Jesus  call  himself  "the  Son  of 
man,"  while  his  greatest  prophet  and  his  disciples  all  say  "  Son 
of  God?" 

The  facts  of  usage  in  regard  to  these  two  designations— "  Son 
of  man"  and  "Son  of  God" — are  striking  and  full  of  precious 
significance. 

1.  Usually  and  almost  invariably  Jesus  calls  himself — "  T/te 
Son  of  man."  We  may  say  he  uses  this  name  manifestly  in  prefer- 
ence to  any  other.  He  does  not  disclaim  the  title,  "  Son  of  God  ;  " 
does  not  seem  to  object  to  it  as  used  by  others ;  never  hints  that  it 
is  in  any  wise  inappropriate :  but  yet  for  some  reason  it  is  not  the 
name  of  his  choice  for  his  own  purposes. In  point  for  illustra- 
tion are  the  passages  Matt.  26:  63,  64,  and  Luke  22:  69,  70.  On 
his  trial  before  the  Jewish  Council  the  High  Priest  said — "  I  adjure 
thee,  tell  us  whether  thou  be  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God."  Jesus 
answered — Thou  hast  said  [expressing  assent] ;  but  adds  in  his 
own  words  ;  "  Hereafter  shall  ye  see  the  Son  of  man,  sitting  on  the 
right  hand  of  power  and  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven.'      Here 

"  Son  of  man'   is  for  his  own  use  the  name  of  his  choice. As 

recorded  by  Luke,  thus:  "Hereafter  shall  the  Son  of  man  sit  on 
the  right  hand  of  God."  "Then  said  they  all.  Art  thou  then  the 
Son  of  God?  And  he  said  unto  them,  Ye  say  that  I  am  "  [it  is  as 
ye  have  said].  Thus  we  see  he  does  not  choose  the  name  "  Son  of 
God  "  for  his  own  use ;  yet  accepts  it  as  entirely  just  when  used  by 
others. 

2.  Throughout  the  entire  gospel  history  the  disciples  never  call 
Jesus  "  The  Son  of  man."  The  name  which  Jesus  chooses  for  his 
use,  they  never  have  chosen  for  theirs.  *  We  may  perhaps  find 
some  adequate  reason  why  they  did  not  use  tlie  same  name  which 
Jesus  so  constantly  prefers  to  use  for  himself 

3.  With   remarkable  uniformity  the  disciples,  and   indeed   all 

others  save  Jesus,  use  the  name  "  Son  of  God." The  disciples 

use  it  in  their  most  defined  doctrinal  statements — as  we  might  say, 
in  their  most  formal  confessions  of  faith.     Thus  in  that  striking 

*  The  case  of  Stephen  (Acts  7:  56)  looking  into  the  open  heavens 
and  beholding  there  "  the  Son  of  man  standing  on  the  right  hand  of 
God,"  is  only  a  partial  exception,  for  Stephen  was  not  one  of  the  origi- 
nal disciples  personally  conversant  with  Jesus  in  the  flesh,  and  more- 
over these  words  may  be  virtually  quoted  from  the  lips  of  Jesus  as 
above,  Matt.  20 :  04. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I.  41 

conversation  recorded  by  Matthew  (IG:  13-20)  when  Jesus  asked 
his  disciples — "  Whom  do  men  say  that  I,  the  Son  of  man,  am?"  they 
answered  first  as  to  the  various  opinions  of  the  Jewish  people — 
"  Some  say  thou  art  John  the  Baptist,  some  Elias  ;  and  others  Jcre- 
mias,  or  one  of  the  prophets."  But  Jesus,  seeking  to  draw  out  their 
own  faith,  made  his  question  definite  :  "  Whom  say  ye  that  I  am  ?  " 
Then  Simon  Peter — always  prompt  and  foremost — answered  : 
"  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God.",    This  confession 

of  faith,  Jesus  approved  warmly  and  emphatically. The  similar 

confession  of  Peter  (John  6  :  (39)  stands  in  the  revised  text  of 
Tischendorf  in  these  simple  terms:  "  We  have  believed  and  have 
known  that  thou  art  the  Holy  One  of  God."  As  put  by  Martha 
(John  11  :  27)  thus:  "I  have  believed  [and  still  believe]  that  thou 
art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  that  should  come  into  the  world." 
This  name  for  Jesus  is  used  by  Satan  in  his  temptation  (Matt.  4 : 
3,  and  Luke  4 :  3,  9)  ;  by  demons  (Matt.  8  :  29,  and  Luke  4 :  41,  and 
8 :  28,  and  ]\Iark  3  :  11) ;  by  men  under  the  awe  of  present  miracles 
(Matt.  14:  33):  "Of  a  truth  thou  art  the  Son  of  God:  " — by  the 
High  Priest  adjuring  him  to  testify  (Matt.  26  :  63)  ;  by  his  revilers 
at  the  cross  (Matt.  27:  4U)  ;  and  by  the  aifrighted  centurion  at  the 
scenes  of  his  death  (j\Iatt.  27  :  54,  and  Mark  15  :  39).  Tlie  standard 
passage,  however,  which  definitely  assigns  the  reason  for  this  name, 
"  Son  of  God,"  is  Luke  1 :  35 — the  words  of  the  angel  Gabriel  to 
Mary:  "The  Holy  Ghost  shall  come  upon  thee,  and  the  power  of 
the  Highest  shall  overshadow  thee;  therefore  also  that  holy  thing 
which  shall  be  born  of  thee  shall  be  called  "the  Son  of  God." 

4.  Returning  to  speak  more  definitely  of  the  usage  of  our  Lord 
himself  as  to  his  significant  names,  note  that  he  employs  the  title 
of  his  usual  choice,  "  Son  of  man,"  with  equal  freedom,  Avhether 
the  scene  suggests  his  humiliation  or  his  glory.  On  the  one  hand, 
"  the  Son  of  man  hath  not  where  to  lay  his  head"  (Matt.  8:  20): 
on  the  other,  "When  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his  glory  and 
all  the  holy  angels  with  him,  then  shall  he  sit  upon  the  throne  of 
his  glory  and  before  him  shall  be  gathered  all  nations."  "The 
Son  of  man  shall  come  in  the  glory  of  his  Father  with  his  angels  " 
(Matt.  16:  27,  28  ;  also  Matt.  9:  6,  and  13:  41,  and  24:  27,  30,  and 
Mark  8:  38,  etc.,  etc.)     " 

5.  The  cases  in  which  Jesus  speaks  of  himself  as  "the  Son  of 
God  "  are  not  only  few  compared  with  those  in  which  he  calls  him- 
self "  the  Son  of  man,"  but  are  somewhat  less  direct,  not  being  the 
subject  of  the  verb,  but  put  in  remote  cases.  Of  this  sort  are  these  : 
"  Condemned  because  he  hath  not  believed  on  the  name  of  the 
only-begotten  Son  of  God"  (John  3:  18):  "The  dead  shall  hear 
the  voice  of  the  Son  of  God"  (John  5  :  25)  ;  To  the  man  born  blind — 
"  Dost  thou  believe  on  the  Son  of  God  ?  "  (John  9  :  35)  ;  "  Say  ye 
of  him  whom  the  Father  hath  sent  into  the  world,  '  Thou  blas- 
phemest,'  because  I  said,  I  am  the  Son  of  God?"  (John  10:  36). 
"  This  sickness  is  not  unto  death  but  for  the  glory  of  God  that  the 
Son  of  God  might  be  glorified  thereby  "  (John  11  ;  4).  These  cases 
suffice  to  show  that  Jesus  by  no  means  disowns  this  title  though 


42  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  I. 

his  fai"  more  frequent  use  of  the  name  "Son  of  man,"  indicates 
his  decided  preference. 

.  From  this  classification  of  the  facts  of  New  Testament  usage,  let 
us  turn  a  moment  to  the  further  question  as  to  the  supposable 
reasons  for  the  usage  both  of  Jesus  and  of  his  disciples,  and  of  its 
moral  significance: 

1.  May  it  be  supposed  that  Jesus  said  commonly  "Son  of  man" 
as  being  less  oifonsive  to  his  enemies?  We  may  notice  that  they 
never  objected  to  his  use  of  this  name,  and  did  not  put  it  into  their 
indictment  against  him  ;  while  they  did  emphatically  object  to  his 
calling  himself,  "  The  Son  of  God.'  To  their  superficial  eyes,  the 
deep  significance  of  the  title,  "The  Son  of  man,"  may  have  been 
veiled,  and  its  modesty  may  have  disarmed  their  jealousy — as  it 
certainly  should. 

2.  This  chosen  title — "The  Son  of  man" — manifestly  looks 
toward  the  incarnation — the  great  fact  of  his  earthly  life.  It  must 
always  suggest  his  human  relations ;  and  we  can  not  forbear  to 
say — suggest  them  as  those  of  which  he  was  never  ashamed.  Low 
as  the  race  of  man  might  be  relatively  to  the  Infinite  and  ever 
blessed  God — exceeding  far  below  the  glory  which  the  pre-existent 
Logos  "  had  with  the  Father  before  the  world  Avas ;  "  yet  Jesus  never 
sought  to  suppress,  conceal  or  throw  into  the  background  the  fact 
of  his  being  born  of  woman  into  alliance  with  our  unworthy  race. 

3.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  of  the  utmost  consequence  to  hold 
in  mind  that  this  title,  "The  Son  of  man,"  always  implied  his 
pre-existent  divinity.  For  he  was  no  ordinary  "  Sou  of  man," 
but  par  excellence,  "the  Son  of  man;"  not  aui/  Son  of  man 
merely  human;  for  this  would  nullify  all  its  real  significance. 
He  stood  forth  alone  in  this  grand  distinction  of  his  nature — that 
being  eternally  divine  ;  from  eternity  "  with  God,"  and  being  really 
himself  God,  he  yet  "  became  flesh  and  dwelt  among  us  ;  "  was 
born  of  woman  with  no  other  fiither  .than  God ;  and  for  this  rea- 
son especially  bore  the  name,  "  The  Son  of  God  ;  "  while  yet  with 
reference  to  this  human  birth  ho  assumed  and  ennobled  the  title 
"  The  Son  of  man."  Thus  this  chosen  title — "  The  Son  of  man  " — 
always  assumed  and  implied  the  pre-existent,  pre-eminent  glory 
of  his  divine  nature,  yet  assumed  it  in  no  repulsive  form,  but  with 
consummate  modesty  and  humility — evermore  with  the  bearing 
of  inefiably  tender  love  to  his  redeemed  people  as  his  brethren 
in  the  relationships  of  human  flesh.  As  has  been  well  said,  the 
spirit  of  this  chosen  designation  is  put  in  the  remark  of  the  Evan- 
gelist John  where  he  introduces  the  account  of  Jesus  washing  his 
disciples'  feet.  "  Jesus,  knowing  that  the  Father  had  put  all 
things  into  his  hand,  and  that  he  was  come  from  God  and  went 
to  God,  riseth  from  supper,  and  laid  aside  his  garments  ;  took  a 
towel  and  girded  himself" — to  wash  their  feet.  Fully  aware  of 
his  own  inherent  and  divinely  recognized  dignity  of  rank  and 
glory ;  with  those  great  facts  of  his  past  and  of  his  future  fully  in 
his  mind,  he  condescended  to  this  service — most  menial  according 
to  the  notions  of  men— that  he  might  leave  to  the  world  through 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  II.  43 

all  its  future  ages  this  illustrious  example.  So  every  time  he  used 
of  himself  the  name,  "  The  Son  of  man,"  he  meant  it  should 
breathe  the  same  spirit  of  voluntary  humiliation  for  love's  sake — 
of  willing  sympathy  with  the  lowliest  for  the  sake  of  uplifting 
them  toward  purity  and  goodness  and  God. 

4.  In  view  of  this  sublime  moral  influence  of  the  usage  by  our 
Lord  of  the  title,  "The  Son  of  man,"  and  also  of  its  natural  and 
forcible  implication  of  his  pre-existent  divinity,  it  may  at  least  be 
gravely  questioned  whether  it  is  not  really  a  higher  title  and  one 
of  more  sublime  significance  than  the  other — "  Son  of  God." 
This  title — "The  Son  of  God" — as  interpreted  by  the  angel 
Gabriel — while  it  starts  with  the  divine,  looks  toward  the  human  ; 
suggests  it;  implies  it:  even  as  the  title — "The  Son  of  man" 
expresses  the  human  side  but  assumes  and  implies  the  higher 
nature,  the  divine. 

5.  These  considerations  suffice  to  show  why  the  title  — "  The  Son 
of  man"  was  inexpressibly  pertinent,  suggestive,  precious  as  used 
by  Jesus  of  himself,  but  altogether  inept  to  be  used  of  him  by  his 
disciples.  Remarkably  their  sense  of  fitness  recoiled  utterly  from 
using  this  title  of  their  Lord.  Was  it  not  because  they  felt  that 
its  deeper  implication  of  a  pre-existent  divinity  was  entirely  in- 
appropriate to  their  lips,  and  its  beautiful  humility  and  conde- 
scension as  coming  from  his  lips  quite  lost,  not  to  say  reversed,  as 

falling  from  theirs? On  the  other  hand,  the  title,  "The  Son 

of  God,"  was  level  to  their  position,  involved  the  very  assumption 
which  it  was  becoming  in  them  to  make,  and  therefore  became 
their  standard  designation. 


CHAPTER   II. 

The  topics  of  this  chapter  are — The  marriage  in  Cana,  and  the 
miracle  of  water  made  wine  (vs.  1-11);  a  short  stay  at  Caper- 
naum (v.  12) ;  Jesus  at  the  Passover  in  Jerusalem,  purifying  the 
temple  (vs.  13-16),  and  what  it  suggested  to  his  disciples  (v.  17); 
the  demand  of  the  Jews  for  a  sign  to  confirm  his  authority  for  as- 
suming such  control  of  the  temple  and  the  resulting  conversa- 
tions (vs.  18-22) ;  the  moral  impression  made  by  these  first  mira- 
cles and  Christ's  intuitive  knowledge  of  men's  hearts  (vs.  23-25). 

1.  And  the  third  day  there  was  a  marriage  in  Cana  of 
Galilee;  and  tlie  mother  of  Jesus  was  there: 

2.  And  both  Jesus  was  called,  and  his  di.^ciples,  to  the 
marriage. 

"  Oq  the  third  day" — i.  e.  after  the  events  of  John  1 :  43-51, 
which  occurred  when  Jesus  was  about  to  leave  the  locality  where 


4.4  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  II. 

John  the  Baptist  had  been  preaching  and  go  back  to  his  early 
home  in  Galilee.  This  is  "  Cana  of  Galilee  "  in  distinction  from 
another  Cana  named  Josh.  19 :  28,  in  the  tribe  of  Ashur,  far  -west 
toward  Phenicia.* 

The  mother  of  Jesus  was  there  before  his  arrival,  coming  ap- 
parently from  her  own  home  at  Nazareth.  It  is  every  way  prob- 
able that  one  or  both  of  the  parties  in  this  marriage  were  near 
relatives  to  Mary.     This  will  naturally  account  for  hfer  presence 

there,  for  her  interest,  and  for  her  position  of  influence. This 

family  relationship  would  secure  the  invitation  of  Jesus.  Five 
disciples,  having  so  recently  attached  themselves  to  him,  were 
now  with  him — thus  unexpectedly  swelling  the  number  of  guests 
at  this  humble  Avedding-feast — a  fact  which  perhaps  may  account 
for  the  failure  of  the  wine-supply. 

3.  And  when  tliey  wanted  wine,  the  mother  of  Jesus 
saith  unto  him,  They  have  no  wine. 

4.  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Woman,  what  have  I  to  do  with 
thee?  mine  hour  is  not  yet  come. 

5.  His  mother  saith  unto  the  servants,  "Whatsoever  he 
saith  unto  you,  do  it. 

The  Sinaitic  manuscript  reads,  v.  3:  "And  they  had  no  wine, 
because  the  wine  of  the  marriage  was  finished  " — which  is  sub- 
stantially adopted  by  Tischendorf.  The  sense  is  unchanged  by 
this  emendation,  since  both  readings  imply  that  a  small  stock  had 
been  provided,  and  (supposably  by  the  unexpected  increase  of 

guests)  exhausted. The  mother  of  Jesus,  sympathizing  keenly 

with  the  family  in  these  straits,  said  to  him;  "  They  have  no 
wine."  His  reply  assumes  that  she  looked  to  him  for  relief  in 
this  emergency,  and  probably  for  relief  by  miracle. He  an- 
swers,  "What  is  there  to  me  and  to  thee,  woman?"  i.  e.  What 

thoughts  and   purposes  have  we  in  common  ? Much  in  the 

spirit  of  the  remark  made  to  his  parents  many  years  earlier  : 
"Wist  ye  not  that  I  must  be  about  my  Fathers  business?" 
(Luke  2  :  49.)  It  seemed  to  him  important  to  say  even  to  one  so 
much  respected  as  his  mother,  that  in  his  work  as  the  Messiah — 
the  incarnate  Son  of  God — he  must  move  in  a  plane  of  life  and 
purpose  far  other  than  hers,  and  therefore  he  could  not  be  con- 
trolled by  her  opinions,  much  less  by  her  authority.     He  must 

judge  for  himself  when  his  time  for  a  miracle  had  come. The 

case  affords  not  the  least  countenance  to  the  Komisli  doctrine  of 

Mary's  power  as  mediator  with  her  son  Jesus. Yet  note  that 

the  name  he  used — "Woman"  (rather  than  mother) — was  not 
disrespectful,  for  he  used  it  again  while   hanging  on  the  cross 

*  Dr.  Robinson  fullj^  identified  the  Cana  of  this  miracle,  bearing 
the  name  of  "  Kana  el  Jelil "  («.  e.  of  Galilee),  "about  N.  ^E.  from 
Nazareth,  and  not  far  from  three  hours  (nine  miles)  distant."  Rob. 
Researches,  pp.  204-208,  First  Edition. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  II.  45 

(John  19 :  2G),  where  the  spirit  of  his  address  is  at  the  f\irthest 
possible  remove  from  being  disrespectful.  But  he  did  not  say 
"Mother."  After  his  public  ministry  began,  he  never  (so  far  as 
is  shown  by  the  record)  called  her  "mother" — another  fact  fatal 

to  the  Romish  assumption. His  mother  indicates  no  spirit  of 

offense  at  his  plain  words  ;  but,  remarkably,  seems  to  have  taken 
some  encouragement  as  to  helj)  toward  her  object,  shown  in  her 
instructions  to  the  servants  to  do  any  thing  he  might  direct. 

6.  And  there  were  set  there  six  waterpots  of  stone,  after 
the  manner  of  the  purifying  of  the  Jews,  containing  two  or 
three  firkins  apiece. 

Personal  cleanliness  was  one  of  the  virtues  of  the  Jews — made 
yet  more  sacred  by  their  religion.  Hence  this  provision  in  the 
household   for  large   supplies   of   water,  not  improbably  in  this 

case  an  increased  supply  for  the  company  expected. As  to  the 

capacity  of  these  vessels,  the  record  is  not  quite  definite — "  two 
or  three  firkins  apiece."  Supposing  them  to  average  2.},  and  the 
Greek  word  for  "firkins"  to  indicate  (as  estimated)  8|  gallons, 
then  each  water-pot  Avould  hold  21  gallons,  and  the  six,  126  gal- 
lons, or  about  four  barrels.  In  this  estimate  critical  authorities 
substantially  concur. 

7.  Jesus  saitli  unto  them,  Fill  the  waterpots  w'ith  water. 
And  they  filled  them  up  to  the  brim. 

8.  And  he  saith  unto  them.  Draw  out  now,  and  bare  unto 
the  governor  of  the  feast.     And  they  bare  it. 

The  pots  being  filled  entirely  full  of  water,  there  could  be  no 

reasonable   suspicion  that   Avine  was  afterwards   added. The 

"  governor  of  the  feast "  had  the  general  direction  of  the  enter- 
tainment and  of  its  order. 

9.  When  the  ruler  of  the  feast  had  tasted  the  water  that 
was  made  wine,  and  knew  not  whence  it  was,  (but  the  serv- 
ants which  drew  the  water  knew,)  the  governor  of  the  feast 
called  the  bridegroom, 

10.  And  saith  unto  him.  Every  man  at  the  beginning 
doth  set  forth  good  wine ;  and  Avhen  men  have  well  drunk, 
then  that  which  is  worse :  but  thou  hast  kept  the  good  Avine 
until  now. 

Not  knowing  the  source  of  supply,  and  judging  by  the  taste  only, 
he  pronounced  it  '■'good,"  and  seemed  surprised -that  it  should 
have  been  reserved  till  near  the  close  of  the  feast. 

There  has  been  much  discussion  of  the  Greek  verb  translated — 
"  have  well  drunk,"  *  some  supposing  it  to  mean,  have  drank 
rather  freely,  yet  short  of  intoxication;  while  others  give  it  the 


40  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  II. 

sense — "  have  drank  to  intoxication."  The  cases  of  its  Xew  Tes- 
tament usage  give  the  sense  "  drunken  "  with  entire  uniformity,  as 
the  reader  may  see  :  Matt.  24  :  69 — "  to  drink  with  the  dnmken ;  " 
Acts  2:  15 — "  these  arc  not  drunken  as  ye  suppose  ;  "  1  Cor.  11 : 
21 — "  another  is  drunken  ;  "  1  Thcss.  5  :  7 — "  are  drunken  in  the 
night;  "  Rev.  17 :  2,  6 — "have  been  made  drunk  with  the  wine  of 
her  fornication  ;  "  "I  saw  the  woman  drxmken  with  the  blood  of 
the  saints,"  etc.  The  cognate  verb  bears  the  same  sense  in  every 
case,  viz,  Luke  12 :  45,  and  Eph.  5:18,  and  1  Thess.  5 :  7.  The 
principle  that  "  usage  gives  law  to  language,"  would  seem  there- 
fore to  admit  nothing  less  in  this  case  than  to  have  drunk  quite 

freely,  so  that  its  effects  are  apparent. The  exigencies  of  the 

case  where  a  word  is  used  must  be  allowed  a  certain  measure  of 
influence  in  fixing  its  meaning  there.  In  the  case  of  a  marriage- 
feast  in  rural  Galilee,  we  should  be  shocked  to  read — "  After  the 
guests  have  made  themselves  drunk,  then  set  before  them  poorer 
wine."  Judicious  criticism  will  therefore  seek  to  give  due  weight 
to  each  of  these  considerations — the  exigencies  of  the  case  on  the 
one  hand,  and  the  usage  of  the  staple  word  on  tlie  other,  and  will 
arrive  at  this  medium  result : — After  the  guests  have  drank  to  the 
point  of  apparent  exhilaration,  then  give  them  wine  of  second- 
rate  quality. But  the  sense  of  this  verb  is  not  specially  im- 
portant for  any  supposed  bearing  upon  the  state  of  the  guests  at 
this  feast  in  particular,  inasmuch  as  the  remark  of  the  governor 
of  the  feast  refers  not  to  tlie  condition  of  his  company,  but  to  the 
general  custom  of  serving  wine  at  festivals  :  Every  man  in  the 
position  I  now  hold,  regulating  the  order  of  the  entertainment, 
gives  his  guests  the  best  wine  first ;  the  inferior  grade  aftei'wards 
when  men  have  already  drank  enough,  the  reason  for  this  usage 
being  perhaps  to  lessen  or  remove  the  temjstation  to  drink  too 
much. 

11.  This  beginning  of  miracles  did  Jesus  in  Cana  of  Gal- 
ilee, and  manifested  forth  his  glory ;  and  his  disciples  be- 
lieved on  him. 

This  was  the  first  miracle  wrought  by  Jesus,  and  consequently 
Avas  the  first  step  in  this  special  manifestation  of  his  divine  glory. 
It  answered  its  special  object  in  confirming  the  faith  of  his  new 
disciples. 

Some  general  points  made  or  suggested  by  the  account  of  this 
first  miracle  should  receive  more  special  attention  : 

1.  Its  bearing  against  the  idolatrous  worship  of  the  virgin  Mary, 
and  against  prayer  to  her  as  mediator  with  her  son  Jesus,  is  most 
decisive.  What  could  have  been  more  so  ?  It  would  seem  that 
Jesus  must  have  intended  to  suppress  the  first  tendencies  toward 

such  reliance  upon  his  mother  and  such  homage  to  her. As 

we  might  expect  from  such  a  man  in  such  circumstances,  Calvin 
hurls  from  this  text  the  sternest  denunciations  against  the  then 
current  Romanist  folly  and  crime  of  Mary-worship. 

2.  The  case  bears  a  noble  testimony  of  approbation  and  honor 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  II.  47 

to  the  marriage  institution.  Jesus  purposely  sanctioned  marriage 
by  his  presence  in  company  with  his  disciples,  as  one  of  tiie  first 
public  acts  of  his  ministry.  How  could  he  have  given  this  insti- 
tution a  more  emphatic  indorsement  ? 

3.  Must  we  not  add  also  to  this,  that  he  recognized  the  propri- 
ety of  a  certain  deference  to  the  social  usages  of  society,  such  as 
a  joyous  festival  in  connection  with  the  marriage  of  friends?  lie 
not  only  attended  this  festival,  but  contributed  miraculously  to 
supply  the  deficiency  of  wine  for  the  occasion.  Perhaps  he 
deemed  it  the  more  important  to  make  his  example  clear  and 
strong  on  this  point  because  he  would  not  give  his  sanction  to  the 
ascetic  spirit  which  was  current  in  his  age  among  the  Jewish 
Essenes,  and  which  the  life  of  John  the  Baptist  mighty  be  sup- 
posed to  favor. The  example  of  Jesus  in  this  case  is  liable,  no 

doubt,  to  abuse ;  yet  this  is  no  reason  why  it  should  not  be  ac- 
cepted in  its  legitimate  influence,  sweetly  hallowing  the  innocent 
joys  of  social  life,  and  assuring  us  that  our  divine  Father  re- 
joices in  the  social  enjoyments  which  he  has  himself  provided 
for  his  children  in  the  paths  of  virtue. 

4.  We  must  not  pass  this  case  without  carefully  considering  its 

relations  to  the  cause  of  temperance. It  is  simply  inevitable  that 

this  miracle  should  awaken  the  most  intense  interest  for  its  real 
or  supposed  bearings  on  the  temperance  question,  both  among  the 
advocates  of  free  or  moderate  drinking,  and  the  advocates  of  total 
abstinence.  Did  Jesus  create  by  miracle  a  large  quantity  of  al- 
coholic wine,  to  be  drank  by  himself,  his  disciples,  his  mother, 
and  the  family  relatives  and  friends  ?  If  so,  why  should  not  his 
example  justify  the  use — at  least,  the  festive  use — of  alcoholic 
wine  as  a  beverage,  and  its  indefinite  manufacture  for  such  use  ? 

The  following  points  will  naturally  be  involved  in  this  discus- 
sion : 

(1.)  It  is  an  open  question  whether  the  wine  made  by  this  mir- 
acle was  at  all  alcoholic.  It  might  look  like  common  wine  and 
taste  like  it,  without  any  alcohol  whatever.  There  can  be  no 
positive  proof  of  the  presence  of  alcohol  in  this  wine. Yet  in- 
asmuch as  it  was  called  wine,  with  no  intimation  of  any  thing  pe- 
culiar in  it,  it  must,  I  think,  be  conceded  as  in  a  degree  probable 
that  it  did  not  differ  in  this  respect  from  the  wine  ordinarily  used 
on  such  occasions.  It  is  certain  (judging  from  the  record)  that 
our  Lord  did  not  say  in  so  many  words—"  I  disapprove  the  use 
of  wine  that  might  cause  drunkenness,  and  therefore  have  made 
this  harmless  in  that  respect." 

(2.)  As  the  governor  of  the  feast  called  this  wine  "  good,"  another 
debatable  question  will  turn  on  the  standard  tests  of  "  good  wine." 
What  kind  of  wine  was  then  accounted  "  good ;  " — the  new  un- 
fermented  article,  without  alcohol;  or  the  fermented,  containing 
alcohol  ? 

In  favor  of  the  former  alternative  it  might  be  said — (a)  That 
the  Orientals  prized  most  highly  the  first  flowings  of  the  juice 
of  the  grape,  that  whi(  h  exuded  under  very  slight  pressure,  and 


48  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  II. 

was  entirely  sweet — non-alcoholic. (6)  Kings,  {e.  g.  in  Egypt, 

Gen.  40:  II,)  in  a  condition  to  command  what  Avas  deemed  the 
perfection  of  luxury,  drank  wine  pressed  from  grape  clusters  be- 
fore their  eyes.  Of  course  this  wine  was  unfermentcd,  and  pure 
from  alcohol. (c)  It  is  in  evidence  that  the  ancients  had  meth- 
ods, analogous  though  inferior,  to  the  modern  process  of  canning, 
by  which  fermentation  was  prevented.  I  am  not  aAvare  that  it  can 
be  ascertained  to  what  extent  any  of  these  methods  were  prac- 
ticed in  Galilee  at  the  Christian  era. 

Yet  all  these  considerations  in  favor  of  the  theory  that  the  wine 
accounted  "good"  in  that  age  was  unfermented,  seem  to  me  to 
be  outweighed  by  the  manifest  implication  in  the  Greek  word  here 
used  (and  in  what  is  said  here)  that  this  "  good  wine  "  did  exhil- 
arate men  perceptibly — so  much  that  it  was  deemed  expedient, 
after  men  had  drunk  of  it  somewhat  freely,  to  exchange  it  for 
wine  of  inferior — /.  e.  less  stimulating  properties.  Truth  should 
be  sought  and  evidence  weighed  with  candor  :  hence  I  feel  com- 
pelled to  make  this  admission. 

(3.)  Most  vital  of  all  is  the  fact  that  the  circumstances  in  the 
age  of  our  Lord  were  so  entirely  different  from  Avhat  they  are  now 
that  no  inference  can  be  drawn  from  his  acts  then  to  settle  ques- 
tions of  duty  now.  Then,  distilled  liquors  were  unknown.  Liq- 
uors adulterated  with  active  poisons  had  not  then  as  now  filled  and 
flooded  all  the  channels  of  commerce  until  no  purchaser  can  have 
the  slightest  assurance  that  what  he  buys  under  the  name  of  wine 
has  the  first  drop  of  grape-juice  in  it.  The  wines  of  Palestine 
in  that  age  were  not  "  enforced"  as  they  often  are  now  by  the 
addition  of  alcohol.  Of  course  there  was  not  then  as  now  a  fear- 
ful inclined  plane  from  fermented  liquors  (beer,  cider,  and  wines) 
down  to  the  countless  forms  of  distilled  spirits — a  plane  down 
which  those  who  begin  to  slide  are  in  infinite  peril  of  the  drunk- 
ard's doom.  In  our  age  the  duty  of  abstinence  from  any  bever- 
age whatsoever  containing  alcohol  rests  mainly  on  the  principle 
which  the  Great  Apostle  has  well  put  and  nobly  honored:  "If 
meat  make  my  brother  to  offend"  (stumble),  "1  will  eat  no  meat 
while  the  world  stands  lest  I  make  my  brother  stumble."  The 
terrible  logic  of  facts  proves  to  us  that  any  use  of  alcoholic  bev- 
erages imperils  the  dearest  welfare  of  men  for  this  world  and  the 
nest.  Therefore  let  every  friend  of  his  race  say — I  will  abstain 
entirely,  and  throw  my  influence  solid  against  all  such  drinks.  I 
do  not  need  to  raise  the  question  whether  drinks  containing  five 
or  ten  per  cent,  of  alcohol  are  necessarily  injurious  to  me.  It 
suffices  that  I  can  live  without  them,  and  that  my  use  of  them 
would  tempt  somebody  to  his  hurt — probably  to  his  ruin.  There- 
fore I  can  not  bear  the  responsibility  of  ensnaring  my  brother  to 
his  ruin  for  the  sake  of  even  a  luxurious  indulgence.  If  the  cir- 
cumstances had  been  such  in  our  Savior's  time  as  they  are  now, 
there  can  not  be  the  slightest  question  how  he  M^ould  have  borne 
himself  He  could  not  have  fallen  below  Paul  in  his  benevolent 
self-sacrifice  for  others'  good.     He  could  not  have  either  made  or 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  II.  49 

drank  alcoholic  bcvcraa;o,s.  What  he  would  have  done  with  al- 
cohol as  a  medicine  it  is  of  no  consequence  here  to  attempt  to  de- 
cide. But  in  the  midst  of  such  drinking  usages  as  obtain  to-day, 
and  of  such  perils  as  those  usages  involve,  and  such  fearful  des- 
olations as  follow,  it  is  simply  impious  to  raise  any  question  as  to 
the  path  of  Christian  duty ;  or — which  is  the  same  thing — any 
question  as  to  the  example  which  our  Lord  would  have  put  before 
the  world  if  the  Avorld  of  his  time  had  stood  as  to  intoxicating 
drinks  where  it  stands  now. 

But  the  question  may  be  pressed — Did  not  Jesus  Jcnoro  that 
alcohol  Avould  come  in  like  a  flood  in  this  nineteenth  century? 
Could  he  not  anticipate  every  element  in  our  present  circumstan- 
ces and  give  us  example  and  instruction  dclinitcly  adapted  to 
them  all  ? 

I  answer.  There  is  no  occasion  to  deny  his  perfect  foreknowl- 
edge ;  but  there  is  ground  for  saying  that  he  lived  and  taught  with 
definite  adaptation  to  the  generation  then  present,  and  not  with 
like  adaptation  to  generations  eighteen  centuries  in  the  future. 
The  examples  and  precepts  of  the  Bible  Avere  always  naturally  and 
necessarily  those  of  the  times  then  present.  As  Jesus  was  to  live 
but  one  life  on  earth,  and  as  that  must  needs  be  Avith  and  before 
the  men  of  his  time,  so  he  could  shape  his  example  only  for  the 
men  of  his  generation,  and  his  precepts  must  have  a  special  adjust- 
ment to  those  times — applicable  to  other  times,  hoAvever,  in  so  far 
as  the  circumstances  Avere  similar  and  the  inA'olved  principles 
analogous;  no  farther.  No  other  Avay  of  making  up  a  Bible  for 
the  race  Avas  Avisely  practicalde.  Jt  must  have  been  addressed 
to  the  generation  then  living;  written  for  them  and  adjusted  to 
their  circumstances ;  or  it  Avould  liaAC  been  nearly  useless. — Be- 
sides ;  if  Ave  insist  that  it  ought  to  be  specially  adjusted  to  the 
nineteenth  century,  Avhy  may  not  our  remote  posterity  claim  Avith 
equal  force  that  it  be  adjusted  to  the  nine  hundredth  century? 
Which  of  all  the  centuries  doAvn  to  the  last  shall  have  the  prefer- 
ence? 

But  whether  Ave  can  give  truly  all  the  reasons  for  the  divine 
method  in  making  up  a  Bible,  (viz,  the  method  of  inspiring  holy 
men  to  IIa'c  each  in  his  OAvn  ago  and  to  write  each  his  OAvn  part  for 
his  OAvn  times  severally,)  this  at  least  is  true : — The  Bible  is  Avritten 
60  and  not  otherwise.  Jesus  lived  before  his  OAvn  generation — not 
before  any  other;  set  his  example  there,  and  not  elseAvherc ;  ad- 
justed his  life  to  those  times,  and  not  to  any  other  times ;  and  con- 
sequently ncA^er  paused  to  say — "About  so  many  hundred  years 
from  this  day  a  process  of  making  alcohol  by  distillation  Avill  be 
discoA'ered,  and  by  consequence  the  amount  and  A'ariety  of  drunk- 
ard's drinks  Avill  be  immensely  increased  ;  and  then  the  use  of  fer- 
mented Avines  Avill  come  to  sustain  an  entirely  ncAv  relation  to  the 
public  welfare,"  etc.,  etc.  All  this  AA^as  destined  to  become  true, 
and  the  divine  mind  doubtless  foresaAV  it; — but  ^\\vat  then?  No 
such  anticipatory  instruction  appears  in  the  Bible.  The  principles 
that  are  to  be  applied  to  determine  duty  are  there.     The  special 


50  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  II. 

circumstances  to  "which  they  are  to  he  applied  are  to  he  found  hy 
every  man  in  his  OAvn  ceutviry,  amid  his  own  jiersonal  surround- 
ings. 

The  comments  made  by  Dean  Alford  in  his  commentary  on  tliis 
miracle  of  the  wine  are  so  extraordinary  that  1  can  not  forbear  to 
quote  and  notice  them. — He  says:  "The  Lord  here  most  effectu- 
ally and  once  for  all  stamps  with  his  condemnation  that  false  sj's- 
tem  of  moral  reformation  which  would  commence  hy  i^ledges  to 
abstain  fru7)i  intoxicating  liquors.  lie  pours  out  his  bounty /or 
all;  and  he  vouchsafes  his  grace  to  eacJb  for  guidance;  and  to  en- 
deavor to  evade  the  work  which  he  has  appointed  for  every  man 
htj  refusing  the  bounty  to  save  tJte  trouble  of  seeking  the  grace  is 
an  attempt  which  must  ever  end  in  degradation  of  the  individual 
motives,  and  in  social  demoi'alization,  whatever  present  apparent 
effects  may  follow  its  first  promulgation." — These  are  Dean 
Alford's  words  :  the  italics  for  emphasis  are  his  own. — I  have  read 
them  over  and  over,  each  time  Avith  utter  and  painful  amazement. 
What!  Are  there  no  drunkards'  graves  in  England?  While  the 
rich  are  drinking  wine,  are  not  the  poor  led  on  by  this  example  in 
high  places  to  drink  cheaper  fermented  and  distilled  liquors,  till 
the  curse  of  strong  drink  has  fallen  like  the  plague  upon  the  whole 
land,  with  its  desolations  of  poverty,  pauperism,  want,  disease, 
premature  death,  crime,  and  eternal  damnation?  And  are  these 
evils  so  trivial  that  it  would  be  absurd  to  suggest  to  those  who  fill 
high  positions  in  England's  society  that  they  might  well  afford  to 
deny  themselves  their  wines  for  the  sake  of  dissuading  their  less 
wealthy  countrymen  from  all  use  of  drinks  that  intoxicate  ?  Is 
there  no  occasion  in  England  for  the  martyr  spirit  of  Paul — "If 
meat  make-  my  brother  offend  (stumble),  I  will  eat  no  meat  while 

the  world  stands?" Moreover,  have  not  wine  and  strong  drink 

made  many  a  sad  wreck  of  life  in  families  blest  with  every  appli- 
ance for  the  best  culture  and  the  noblest  fruits  of  Christian  man- 
hood? Do  not  the  wine-drinking  usages  of  England,  defended  by 
her  highest  influences  in  church  and  in  state,  cost  too  much? 

But  Dean  Alford  assumes  that  total  abstinence  is  not  only  false 
in  principle,  but  pernicious  in  its  ultimate  results.  In  his  Chris- 
tian  philosophy,  men  should  never  try  to  shun  temptation,  but 

rather  welcome  it,  only  praying  for  grace  accordingly. Does 

he  leave  out  of  his  version  of  the  Lord's  Prayer — "  Lead  me  not 
into  temptation  "  ?  Does  he  sneer  at  Paul  for  saying — "  I  keep 
my  body  under,  lest  I  be  a  castaway  "  ?  Does  he  use  honest  words 
when  he  represents  those  who  pledge  themselves  to  total  absti- 
nence as  "  refusing  the  bounty  to  save  the  trouble  of  seeking  the 
grace  "  ?  Is  such  an  insinuation  creditable  to  a  distinguished  com- 
mentator upon  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ?  Does  he  really  believe 
that  total  abstinence  from  all  that  intoxicates,  carried  into  practice 
from  the  highest  ranks  to  the  lowest  throughout  England,  would 
"degrade  individual  character"  and  beget  "social  demoraliza- 
tion" ?  lias  he  3'et  to  gain  his  first  conception  of  the  moral  sub- 
limity of  self-denial  for  others'  good  ? 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  II.  51 

12.  After  this  he  "svent  down  to  Capernaum,  lie,  and  his 
mother,  and  his  brethren,  and  his  disciples ;  and  they  con- 
tinued there  not  many  days. 

From  Nazereth,  where  Jesus  "had  been  brought  uj) "  (Luke  4: 
16) — where  his  early  Hfe  had  been  spent — the  family  seem  to  have 
removed  ere  this  to  Capci'naum.  To  this  family  home,  the  entire 
gi'oup,  including  the  disciples  ah-eady  called,  came  down  from 
Cana;  but  as  the  Jews'  Passover  was  near,  the  stay  of  Jesus  and 

his  disciples  was  short. The  precise  site  of  Capernaum  is  still 

in  dispute;  the  rival  claimants  being  all  in  the  plain  of  Genes- 
saret,  on  the  western  shore  of  the  Sea  of  Tiberias,  otherwise 
called,  of  Galilee.     See  Smith's  Dictionary,  "  Capernaum." 

13.  And  the  Jews'  passovcr  was  at  hand,  and  Jesus  went 
up  to  Jerusalem, 

Id.  And  found  in  tlie  temple  those  that  sold  oxen  and 
sheep  and  doves,  and  the  changers  of  money  sitting  : 

15.  And  when  he  had  made  a  scourge  of  small  cords,  he 
drove  them  all  out  of  the  temple,  and  the  sheep,  and  the 
oxen ;  and  poured  out  the  changers'  money,  and  overthrew 
the  tables ; 

16.  And  said  unto  them  that  sold  doves.  Take  those  things 
hence ;  make  not  my  Father's  house  a  house  of  merchandise. 

17.  And  his  disciples  remembered  that  it  was  written, 
The  zeal  of  thine  house  hath  eaten  me  up. 

In  calling  this  "the  Jews'  Passover,"  the  writer  shows  that  he 

wrote  for  readers   other  than  Jews. This  Passover  occurred 

not  long  after  the  baptism  of  Jesus  and  his  entrance  upon  his 
public  ministry ;  and  consequently  gives  the  first  data  from  which 
to  estimate  its  entire  duration. 

The  supply  of  the  various  animals  needed  for  sacrifice,  and  the 
exchange  of  foreign  coin  for  the  Jewish  shekel  in  which  the  trib- 
ute for  the  temple  service  must  be  paid,  created  these  branches 
of  business — legitimate  in  themselves,  but  deserving  stern  rebuke 
for  desecrating  the  sacred  localities  of  the  temple.  Jesus  boldly 
and  nobly  assumed  the  right  to  cleanse  his  Father's  house  of  such 
defilement,  and  therefore  drove  out  these  traffickers  and  their  ani- 
mals in  these  memorable  words  :  "  Make  not  my  Father's  house 

a  house  of  merchandise." Was  this  "scourge  of  small  cords  " 

prepared  for  the  tradesmen  as  well  as  for  their  animals  ?  Perhaps 
not.  The  Greek  words,  closely  translated,  would  read:  "  he  drove 
out  all,  both  the  sheep  and  the  cattle."  The  command — "Take 
these  things  hence,"  etc.,  was  addressed  to  those  that  sold  doves, 
for  the  doves  could  not  be  so  well  driven  out  with  a  scourge  ;  per- 
haps it  was  said  also  for  the  other  dealers. 

This  daring  step  impressed  all  parties.  It  suggested  to  his  dis- 
ciples the  words  of  the  Psalmist  (Ps.  60:  10) :  "The  zeal  of  thine 


52  GOSPEL  OF  JOIIN.—CHAP.  IT. 

house  hath  consumed  me."  It  prompted  the  JeAVS  to  demand  of 
him  by  what  authority  he  acted,  and  how  he  supported  his  claim. 

18.  Then  answered  the  Jews  and  said  unto  him,  What 
sign  shewest  thou  unto  us,  seeing  that  thou  doest  these 
things  ? 

ly.  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them.  Destroy  this  tem- 
ple, and  in  three  days  I  will  raise  it  up. 

20.  Then  said  the  Jews,  Forty  and  six  years  was  this  tem- 
ple in  buildhig,  and  wilt  thou  rear  it  up  in  three  days? 

21.  But  he  spake  of  the  temple  of  his  body. 

The  Jews  rightly  understood  these  words  and  acts  of  Jesus 
to  involve  the  assumption  of  being  the  Messiah,  or  at  least  some 
extraordinary  teacher  sent  of  God;  and  therefore,  not  improperly, 
they  demanded  of  him  what  "sign"  (miraculous  indorsement) 
he  put  before  their  eyes  to  justify  himself  for  doing  these  things, 
viz,  cleansing  the  temple. 

The  reply  made  by  Jesus  is  every  way  memorable.  He  did 
not  work  a  miracle  on  the  spot  before  their  eyes,  as  they  perhaps 
expected  and  seem  to  have  demanded.  Jesus  never  Avrought  mir- 
acles iipo7i  call — in  response  to  a  special  demand.  His  conscious 
quiet  dignity  of  character  forbade  it.  While  he  never  fell  below 
the  point  of  giving  adequate  evidence  of  his  !Messiahship — all 
that  could  reasonably  be  asked  for — he  never  descended  to  meet 

the  caprices  or  the  captious  cavils  of  hostile  spirits. In  the 

present  case,  his  words — "Destroy  this  temple,  and  in  three  days 
I  will  raise  it  up" — come  to  us  with  the  evangelist's  own  inter- 
pretation :  "  He  spake  of  the  temple  of  his  body."  I  see  not  the 
least  occasion  to  question  the  soundness  of  this  interpretation, 
although  many  Gorman  commentators — perhaps  half  of  those  'who 

are  of  the  i^resent  century — have  done  so. At  the  moment  of 

this  conversation  the  temple  was  before  every  mind ;  hence  Jesus 
naturally  takes  from  it  his  analogy.  Noticeably  the  analogy  be- 
tween the  Jewish  temple  under  the  old  economy  and  the  human 
body  of  God's  people  under  the  new  became  so  familiar  in  the 
Christian  age  that  Paul  exclaims  against  the  brethren  at  Corinth 
with  amazement:  "What!  know  ye  not  that  your  body  is  the 
temple  of  the  Holy  Ghostwho  is  in  you?"  (1  Cor.  6  :  19.)  "  Know 
ye  not  that  ye  are  the  temple  of  God,  and  that  the  Spirit  of  God 
dwelleth  in  youV  (1  Cor.  3:  16.)  In  the  old  temple  God  dAvelt 
in  a  visible  radiance  of  glory.     In  the  new  he  dwells  by  the  light 

and  glory  of  his  Spirit. There  was  the  more  reason  why  Jesus 

should  assume  that  this  analogy  would  be,  or  ought  to  be,  intelli- 
gible to  the  Jews,  because  it  had  been  foreshadowed  in  their  own 
prophets,  e.  g.  Zcchariah  (2:  5,  10):  "Fori,  saith  the  Lord, 
will  be  the  gloi-y  in  the  midst  of  her."  "Sing  and  rejoice,  O 
daughter  of  Zion,  for  lo,  I  come,  and  I  will  dwell  in  the  midst 

of   thee." It  is  specially   noticeable,  however,  that  this  sign 

given  by  Jesus  was  not  immediately  available ;   it  did  not  bring 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  II,  53 

out  its  groat  power  until  his  actual  death  and  resurrection.  Then 
it  became  the  standard  and  chief  testimony  to  his  divine  Honship. 
"This  Jesus  hath  God  raised  up,  whereof  we  all  are  witnesses" 
(Acts  2  :  32).  "  If  Christ  be  not  risen,  then  is  our  preaching 
vain,  and  _your  faith  is  also  vain"  (1  Cor.  15  :   14). 

The  Savior's  policy  seems  to  have  been  to  bring  out  the  evi- 
dence in  support  of  his  claims  little  by  little  as  men  might  lie 
jirepared  to  receive  it,  reserving  the  most  conclusive  to  tiie  later 
stages  of  the  progressive  demonstration.  On  this  policy  his  resur- 
rection closes  the  argument  from  miracles  triumphantly  with  its 
ci'owning  glory: — "In  three  days  I  Avill  raise  it  up  "—and  men 
shall  know  that  Jesus  was  in  very  deed  the  Son  of  God.  A  method 
that  should  have  reversed  this  order  would  have  been  impolitic — 
not  to  say  impossible. 

The  Jews  insisted  that  the  words  "  this  temple  "  in  the  mouth 
of  Jesus  must  refer  to  their  proud  structure  so  long  under  the 
process  of  rebuilding  by  Ilerod  the  Great.  Hence  they  replied — 
"Forty-six  years  was  this  temple  in  building;  and  wilt  thou  rear 

it  up   in  three  days?" Herod  sought  the    glory  of   splendid 

architecture.  Too  cruel  and  despotic  to  be  in  favor  with  the 
Jews,  yet  sorely  needing  their  good-will  because  of  his  depend- 
ence on  the  Romans,  he  thought  to  ingratiate  himself  into  favor 
by  immensely  lavish  expenditures  in  rebuilding  and  adorning 
their  temple.  As  the  Jews  would  not  trust  him  to  tear  down  the 
old  and  build  anew  from  the  foundation,  he  Avas  compelled  to 
rebuild  piecemeal  by  removing  the  old  in  small  portions  and 
replacing  with  new.  Hence  the  process  "  long  drawn  out "  might 
readily  be  made  to  span  forty-six  years.     It  was  begun  B.C.  20.* 

22.  When  therefore  he  was  risen  from  the  dead,  his  dis- 
ciples remembered  that  he  had  said  this  unto  them;  and 
they  believed  the  Scripture,  and  the  Avord  which  Jesus  had 
said. 

It  is  not  clear  that  even  the  disciples  fathomed  the  depth  of  his 
meaning  at  the  time.  But  after  he  had  risen  from  the  dead, 
these  words  arose  and  lived  again  in  their  thought.  We  may 
suppose  this  was  in  fulfillment  of  the  Savior's  promise — "  The 
Comforter  shall  bring  all  things  to  your  remembrance  whatsoever 
I  have  said  unto  you"  (John  14:  26) — an  illustrative  case  which 
shows  that  the  Spirit  not  only  brought  back  the  words  to  memory, 
but  (what  is  not  only  more  but  better)  brought  to  their  mind  and  ' 
heart  their  deep  significance  no  less. 

23.  Now  when  he  was  in  Jerusalem  at  the  pa.ssover,  in 
the  feast  day,  many  believed  in  his  name,  Avhen  they  saw  the 
miracles  Avhich  he  did. 

24.  But  Jesus  did  not  commit  himself  unto  them,  because 
he  knew  all  men, 

■-■•See  Smith's  Bible  Dictionary,  "Ilerod." 


54  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  III. 

25.  And  needed  not  that  any  should  testify  of  man  ;  for 
he  knew  what  was  in  man. 

This  faith  which  rested  on  the  miracles  of  Jesus  alone  was 
manifestly  superficial,  leaving  the  heart  unchanged  and  unloving. 
Perhaps  they  were  saying  iuAvardly — This  man  might  lead  our 
nation  to  victory  over  the  Komans.  With  such  resources  of  power, 
what  might  he  not  do  to  aggrandize  the  house  of  David? Per- 
haps the  case  may  illustrate  the  natural  imperfection  of  a  belief 
which  rests  on  miracles  only — which  goes  not  beyond  the  convic- 
tion of  great  power,  and  which  limits  its  impression  to  the  in- 
tellect, with  no  bearing  on  the  heart. 

Jesus  kncAV  their  heart  too  well  to  commit  himself  to  them. 
The  Evangelist  avails  himself  of  this  case  to  ascribe  to  Jesus 
that  divine  searching  which  goes  to  the  bottom  of  all  human 
hearts,  before  which  no  thought  or  unborn  act  can  be  hidden. 


CHAPTER   III. 

This  cha]iter  is  in  two  principal  parts:  vs.  1-21  narrate  the 
night  interview  of  Jesus  with  Nicodemus,  and  the  extended  dis- 
course to  which  it  gave  occasion  ;  vs.  22-36  bring  Jesus  once  more 
near  the  scenes  of  John  the  Baptist's  preaching,  and  give  us  the 
last  testimony  of  the  Baptist  to  Jesus  and  to  his  mission  and  doc- 
trine. The  locality  of  the  former  portion  seems  to  have  been  at 
or  near  Jerusalem ;  that  of  the  latter  is  definitely  stated  (v.  2.']). 

1.  There  was  a  man  of  the  Pharisees,  named  Nicodemus, 
a  ruler  of  the  Jews : 

2.  The  same  came  to  Jesus  by  night,  and  said  unto  him, 
Rabbi,  we  know  that  thou  art  a  teacher  come  from  God : 
for  no  man  can  do  these  miracles  that  thou  doest,  except 
God  be  with  him. 

The  charm  of  a  special  interest  gathers  about  these  personal 
labors  of  Jesus  with  individuals,  such  as  this  conversation  by 
night  with  Nicodemus,  and  that  (chap.  4)  with  the  woman  of  Sa- 
maria by  Jacob's  well.  We  see  that  Jesus  entered  warmly  into 
gospel  work  to  enlighten  and  save  even  one  human  soul ;  and  that 
when  he  had  but  one  hearer,  he  availed  himself  of  his  opportu- 
nity to  give  his  instructions  the  more  definite,  and  so  more  efiect- 
ive,  adaptation. 

In  the  first  clause  of  v.  2,  the  corrected  text,  with  the  author- 
ity of  the  three  oldest  and  most  reliable  manuscripts  (S.V.  A.) 
gives  "7tm"  in  place  of  "Jesus"  :  "The  same  came  to  him  by 
niffht."     This  readino;  indicates  a  closer  connection  between  the 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  III.  55 

opening;  of  this  chapter  and  the  close  of  the  preceding,  showing 
that  Nicodcmus  is  one  of  tliose  men  referred  to  (John  2:  23)  wlio 
were  impressed  by  the  miracles  of  Jesus,  but  were  still  in  great 
darkness  on  the  vital  points  of  salvation  through  his  name. 

Nicodemus  was  a  Pharisee  and  a  member  of  the  Jewish  Sanhe- 
drim ;  is  twice  brought  to  light  in  John's  subsequent  history,  viz  ; 
in  7 :  50,  and  in  19  :  i^'J ;  in  the  former  case  protesting  against  the 
action  of  the  council  in  condemning  Jesus  without  a  hearing:  in 
the  latter,  bringing  in  his  tribute  (may  we  hope)  of  loving  sym- 
pathy as  well  as  respect  for  the  Crucified  One — "  an  hundred 
pounds  of  myrrh  and  aloes"  with  which  to  embalm  the  body.  In 
both  references  John  identifies  him  as  the  same  who  first  "  came 
to  Jesus  by  night."  We  are  left  to  infer  that  he  came  by  night, 
not  because  of  the  pressure  of  other  duties  throughout  the  day 
so  much  as  for  a  private  interview  that  should  not  imperil  his 
standing  with  his  brethren  of  the  Sanhcdi-im. 

lie  accosts  Jesus  very  respectfully — My  Lord;  my  Teacher. 

"We  know" — perhaps  speaking  the  convictions  of  other  candid 
men  as  w'ell  as  his  own — "that  thou  art  a  teacher  come  from 
God;  for  no  man  can  do  these  miracles  that  thou  doest  except 
God  be  Avith  him."  Such  miracles  are  wrought  only  by  a  power 
really  superhuman,  and  therefore,  if  not  even  directly  by  God's 
hand,  yet  certainly  %citli  his  ^^ci'^^t.ission  given  to  superhuman 
agents.  Consequently  such  miracles  must  be  accepted  as  God's 
indorsement  of  the  teacher's  mission.  Some  critics  disparage 
the  concession — "Except  God  be  with  him" — as  a  very  low  and 
inadequate  inference  from  the  fact  of  miracles.  I  see  no  special 
force  in  this  criticism.  It  lies  equally  against  Peter  as  against 
Nicodemus  (see  Acts  10:  38):  "How  God  anointed  Jesus  of 
Nazareth  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  power;  who  went  about 
doing  good  and  healing  all  that  were  oppressed  with  the  devil; 
for  God  loas  loith  him."  That  God  should  be  ^^  with  Jesus," 
proving  his  presence  by  miraculous  powers,  is  the  best  and  high- 
est possible  indorsement  of  his  divine  mission — the  very  sort  of 

indorsement  which  should  be  rationally  expected. On  these 

perfectly  valid  grounds,  therefore,  Nicodemus  recognizes  Jesus  as 
a  teacher  sent  from  God,  and  comes  to  him  to  seek  insti'uction 
in  divine  truth.  Jesus  proceeds  at  once  to  teach  him  what  he 
most  of  all  needed  to  learn. 

3.  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him,  Verily,  verily,  I 
say  unto  thee.  Except  a  man  be  born  again,  he  can  not  see 
the  kingdom  of  God. 

4.  Nicodemus  saitli  unto  him,  How  can  a  man  be  born 
■when  lie  is  old?  can  he  enter  the  second  time  into  his 
ni other's  womb,  and  be  born? 

"Jesus  answered" — according  to  New  Testament  usage  is, 
not  necessarily  answering  a  definite   question,  but  may  mean, 


1^. 


56  GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  III. 

taking  np  a  subject  suggested  eithei*  by  some  previous  remark 
or  by  the  circuuastances  of  the  case. 

If  to  some  readers  Jesus  should  seem  to  open  the  subject  of 
the  new  birth  abruptly,  let  it  be  considered — (a.)  That  Nicodemus, 
being  apparently  one  of  the  class  referred  to  (John  2:  23)  had  a 
certain  faith  in  Jesus,  yet  a  faith  which  precisely  lacked  what 
the  new  birth  would  supply.  lie  believed  in  the  power  of  Jesus 
to  work  miracles;  accepted  these  miracles  as  indorsing  his  mis- 
sion from  God  as  a  great  teacher;  yet  came  short  of  accepting 
Jesus  with  loving,  trusting  heart  as  his  own  personal  Savior 
from  sin. — (6.)  These  first  words  of  Jesus  will  no  longer  seem 
abrupt  and  wanting  in  easy  connection  with  pre-existing  ideas  if 
we  bear  in  mind  that  Nicodemus  as  a  well  educated  Jew  had 
definite  notions  respecting  "the  kingdom  of  God" — definite 
though  not  in  all  respects  correct,  and  in  some  great  points  fun- 
damentally defective. He  luas  fa7niliar  wilh  the  j^hrase.     This 

being  a  point  of  no  small  importance,  let  it  be  expanded  so  far 
at  least  as  to  suggest — (1.)  That  the  Old  Testament  prophecies 
(in  his  own  text-book)  are  fall  of  it,  four  of  the  Messianic  Psalms 
(e.  g.)  I'jeing  built  iipon  it  (viz,  the  2d,  45th,  72d  and  110th);  also 
a  very  large  portion  of  all  the  Messianic  prophecies  in  Jeremiah, 
Ezekiel,  and  Zechariah.  They  give  us  a  king  to  reign  after  the 
model  of  David — so  fully  on  his  model  that  several  give  him  the 

very  name  "David,"  in  the  sense  of  a  second  David. (2.)  That 

the  entire  phrase  comes  from  Daniel  (2:  44,  and  7:  13,  14,  27): 
"The  God  of  Heaven  shall  set  up  a  kingdom  Avhich  shall  never 
be  destroyed,"  etc. — hence  called  interchangeably,  "kingdom  of 

God"  and  "kingdom  of  heaven." (3.)  That  John  the  Baptist 

made  these  words  ring  in  the  ears  of  all  Judah  and  Jerusalem — 
"Repent;  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand."  Jesus  began 
his  jireaching  on  the  same  key-note ;  from  the  same  text — in  the 
same 'sense. (4.)  The  masses  of  the  Jews  Averc  certainly  fa- 
miliar with  the  idea;  else  they  Avould  not  have  proposed  to 
"take  him  by  force  to  make  him  a  king"  (John  6:  15);  would 
not  have  brought  him  into  their  city  Avith  all  the  regalia  of  a 
triumph,  shouting  (as  put  in  John  12:  13,  15) — "Hosanna: 
Blessed  is  the  King  of  Israel  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord;"  "Behold,  thy  King  cometh."  See  the  more  full  account, 
Matt.  21 :  1-11,  and  Markll :  1-11,  and  Luke  19:  29-38— a  scene 
so  significant  in  the  life-history  of  Jesus  that  each  of  the  four 

evangelists  has  put  it  on  record. (5.)  His  murderers  taunted 

him  with  liaA'ing  claimed  to  be  "  King  of  the  Jcavs  ;" — and  finally 
(6.) — The  apostles  honored  him  evermore  as  "  Loi'd "  and 
"  King;"  and  most  distinctly  of  all,  the  Revelator  John  gives  high 

and  most  significant  prominence  to  his  kingdom  and  reign. 

Ijet  these  great  facts  sufiice  to  show  that  Jews  of  average  intel- 
ligence, like  Nicodemus,  must  haA'e  been  entirely  familiar  Avith 
the  phrases  "  kingdom  of  God,"  or  "  of  heaven." 

Now  let  it  be  specially  noted  that  Nicodemus  had  some  vital 
things  to  learn  about  this  kingdom,  especially'  about  the  conditions 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAP.  111.  57 

of  inonibcrsbip,  i.  c.  of  citizcnsliip.  As  a  Jew  from  the  loins  of 
Abraham,  he  had  never  thou<i;ht  of  questioning  his  citizenship  in 
this  kingdom  hij  riyht  of  birth .  Was  he  not  born  a  Jc\y  ?  Was 
not  his  pedigree  sanctioned  and  honored  in  the  genealogies  of  his 
nation  ?  Did  any  body  ever  question  his  place  by  birth  in  this 
expected  kingdom  of  the  Messiah  who  should  "  reign  over  the  house 
of  David  forever  "  ? 

This,  then,  is  his  first  fatal  mistake.  To  make  him  a  son  and 
an  heir  in  this  kingdom,  more  is  needed  than  the  birth  he  thinks  of. 
lie  must  have  a  higher  birth  than  that.  !So  Jesus  begins  from  this 
starting-point.  Dcyond  all  question  he  uses  the  figure  of  birth  and 
spcaks'of  being  "  born"  for  this  kingdom  because,  in  the  mind  of 
Nicodemus,  his  birth  from  the  stock  of  Abraham  gave  him  his 
credentials  of  mcm])ership  in  the  kingdom  of  God. Jesus,  there- 
fore, began  with  tlie  solemn  averment — "  Veril3^  verily,  1  say  unto 
thee,  Except  a  man  be  born  from  above,  he  can  not  see  the  king- 
dom of  God."  The  word  which  Jesus  used  *  should  certainly  bo 
translated,  not  "  again,"  hut  fro7n  above.  It  means  precisely  this 
in  its  etymology,  being  a  compound  word,  made  from  two  others, 
one  meaning //-om;  the  other  above.  In  every  other  instance  of 
its  use  in  the'New  Testament,  it  means  from  above,  f 

Moreover,  this  sense  is  to  be  preferred  as  being  more  compre- 
hensive, for  it  not  only  implies  the  sense,  "  again,"  the  second 
birth,  but  points  to  the  source  of  the  power  which  brings  the  new 
birth. 

If  it  be  said — Nicodemus  understood  Jesus  to  mean,  "  born 
again"  and  therefore  we  must  assume  this  to  have  been  his  mean- 
ing, it  may  be  replied: — Nicodemus  did  not  care  to  take  issue  on 
the  primary  idea — the  source  whence  the  new  birth  came;  but 
seized  upon  the  secondary  one — born  another  time,  by  a  new  and 
second  birth,  and  sought  to  push  the  absurdity  of  this  liirth  in  its 
literal  sense.  It  is  not  by  any  means  certain  that  Nicodemus 
failed  to  take  the  sense — born  from  above.  It  is  more  probable 
that  he  left  that  point  unnoticed  because  he  had  nothing  to  say 
about  that.  Moreover,  it  is  supposable  that  Nicodemuswas  not 
altogether  honest.  An  excessive  eagerness  to  involve  his  Rabbi 
in  an  absurdity  may  have  blinded  his  mind  to  the  point  which 
Jesus  sought  to  make  prominent — the  birth.//-o/«  above. 

»  "  avudnv." 

tTlie  most  illustrative  cases  are — John  3:  31:  "lie  that  conieth /row 
ahove  is  above  all;"  John  19:  11:  "Thou  couldest  have  no  power 
against  me  except  it  were  given  thee  from  above;"  James  1 :  17  ; 
"Every  perfect  gift  is  from  above  and  cometh  down  from  the  Father 
of  lights,"  etc.  Also  James  3  :  15,  17  :  "  This  wisdom  descendeth  not 
from  above;"  "  But  the  wisdom  that  is//-oni  above"  etc. The  remain- 
ing cases,  in  the  sense  of  what  is  higher  in  space  or  earlier  in  time, 
may  be  seen,  Matt  27:  51;  Mark  15:  38;  Luke  1:3;  John  19:  23, 
and  Acts  26:  5,  and  Gal.  4:  9.  It  will  be  seen  that  not  one  of  all 
these  cases  will  bear  the  sense  of  again. 


68  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAr.  III. 

To  Nicodcmus,  himself  an  old  man,  the  idea  of  being  born  over 
again  as  at  the  first,  seemed  most  absurd.  Is  it  strange  that  with 
this  view  of  Christ's  meaning  he  should  exclaim — "  How  can  it 
be?"     fTesus  will  explain  in  due  time. 

But  let  us  note  here  that  the  word  "  see"  [z.  e.  the  kingdom], 
Avliile  essentially  synonymous  with  "  enter  into"  in  v.  5,  and  there- 
fore involving  membership  and  all  its  blessings — will  naturally 
suggest  that  accurate  and  impressive  knowledge  which  comes  of 
vision — implying,  therefore,  that  without  the  enlightening  of  the 
Spirit  and  the  sense  of  divine  things  that  comes  with  being  born 
of  the  Spirit,  no  man  will  ever  rightly  and  fully  apj^reciate  and 
know  in  his  deep  experience  what  this  reign  of  Christ  truly  is. 

5,  Jesus  answered,  Verily,  verily,  I  say  nnto  thee.  Except 
a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  S2:)irit,  he  can  not  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  God. 

6.  That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh  ;  and  that  which 
is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit. 

Jesus  solemnly  reaffirms  the  main  points  made  in  v.  3,  j-ct  re- 
affirms Avith  explanatory  modifications.     We  must  note  with  the 

utmost  care  every  point  of  change  in  this  second  speech. (a.) 

The  change  from  "  seeing  the  kingdom  "  to  "  entering  into  the 
kingdom"  can  not  be  regarded  as  specially  significant.  If  (as 
suggested  above)  "  seeing  "  looked  in  a  sort  toward  a  deep  thorough 
apprehension  of  its  meaning,  Jesus  may  have  thought  ])est  to  leave 
out  that  point  and  make  his  affirmation  more  simple,  and  so  more 

emphatic,  with   the    single    point — membership. (6.)    But   to 

change  "  born  from  above  "  to  "born  of  water  and  Spirit"  *  was 
really  an  advance  in  the  way  of  explanation.  It  brought  in  dis- 
tinctly and  by  name  what  was  only  referred  to  before  as  to  the 
source  whence  it  came.  Jesus  teaches  him  that  this  new  birth  is 
wrought  bp  the  Spirit.  In  what  sense  by  water,  I  reserve  for  sul)- 
sequent  discussion.  As  to  the  fact  of  the  Spirit's  agency  in  this 
birth,  there  is  not  the  least  ground  for  doubt   or   diffi2rence  of 

opinion. (c.)  There  is  also  a  very  vital  point  of  explanation  in 

V.  6.  Jesus  would  say :  You  are  thinking  about  that  which  is  "  born 
of  the  flesh  " — of  the  human  mother.  That  will  of  course  be 
nothing  but  a  human  child,  of  mere  flesh  and  blood  like  the  parent. 
1  am  not  speaking  at  all  of  such  a  bii'th.  I  speak  of  being  "  born 
of  the  Spirit"  of  God.  That  which  is  born  thus  of  the  Spirit  will 
be  a  spiritual  product — a  soul  with  a  new  spiritual  life;  morally 
considered,  "a   "  new  creature  ;  "  figuratively   speaking,  "  a   new 

heart   and  a   new  sjjirit"  "put  within." This  truth,  vital  far 

above  all  other  truth  pertaining  to  the  conditions  of  membership 
in  this  kingdom,  Jesus  puts  here,  briefly  indeed,  but  clearly  as  to 
its  vital  elements,  and  in  manner  with  most  impressive  and  solemn 
affirmation. 

*  c^  iiaroa  x^'  T^vn'ftaroa. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  111.  59 

It  remains  to  consider  what  is  meant  here  by  the  word  "  water" 
in  the  phrase—"  born  of  water  and  Wpirit." 

In  the  outset  let  me  apprise  the  reader  that  more  is  depending 
upon  the  sense  of  this  word  "  water"  in  this  passage  than  may 
be  at  first  thought  apparent.  In  a  statement  from  the  lips  of  the 
Great  Teacher  "made  under  circumstances  so  impressive;  in  man- 
ner so  terse  and  comprehensive,  and  bearing  on  a  point  so  vital  as 
the  conditions  of  membership  in  his  kingdom,  every  word  may 
have — nay  more,  must  have  immense  and  telling  significance. 
For  we  must  ask,  Arc  there  here  two  agencies — one  water,  and 
the  other  Spirit;  or  only  one — that  of  the  Spirit?  If  two,  are 
they  both  equally  vital,  both  equally  indispensable?  Is  being 
born  of  the  Spirit  sufiicient  without  being  born  of  water  ?  Is  be- 
ing born  of  Avater  sufficient  without  being  born  of  the  Spirit? 
What  is  the  status  of  him  who  has  been  born  of  water  only  ? 
What  is  his  who,  supposably,  is  born  of  the  Spirit  only,  and  not 

by  water? And  yet  again :  Is  the  term  "  water,"  as  used  here, 

exactly  equivalent  to  baptism?  When  Jesus  says  "water,"  does 
he  mean  baptism,  and  nothing  more  or  less,  so  that  water  is  noth- 
ing except  as  it  is  used  in  the  proper  mode  of  the  ordinance  pf 
baptism  ?  And  does  he  imply  that  baptism  with  water  carries 
Avith  it  the  ncAv  birth  by  the  Spirit?  Or  may  it  be  that  baptism 
has  a  function  to  perform  quite  distinct  from  that  of  the  Spirit, 
and  either  equally  essential  or  not  equally  essential  to  salva- 
tion ? 

Thus  the  questions  over  this  word  "  water,"  branch  out  almost 
indefinitely.  No  intelligent  Bible  reader  ought  to  satisfy  himself 
without  a  very  careful  and  thoroughly  fundamental  investigation 
of  these  points  here  in  issue. 

To  facilitate  progress  we  will  take  first  this  main  question — one 
which  in  fact  Avillruostly  settle  all  the  rest : — Is  "  water"  here  only 
another  word  for  baptism,  referring  to  that  Christian  ordinance, 
implying  it,  meaning  it:  or  is  it  only  a  symbol  of  the  Spirit's 
agency — significant  of  moral  cleansing,  and  having,  therefore,  no 
reference  to  baptism  as  an  external  rite  ? 

As  preliminary  to  the  discussion  before  us,  let  me  remind  the 
reader  that  Je^us  has  for  his  pupil  a  man  of  apparently  fair  can- 
dor [notehoAV  his  candor  appears  in  John  7  :  51] — a  real  inquirer 
after  truth  (not  a  caviler)  ;  so  that  Ave  must  assume  that  Jesus 
aimed  to  enlighten  his  mind,  and  therefore  AA'Ould  use  words  and 
phrases  which  Nicodemus  might  be  expected  to  understand. 
Honest  minds  always  talk  for  the  sake  of  being  understood ;  al- 
ways choose  their  Avords  and  figures  accordingly.  Hence  we  are 
safe  in  assuming  that  Jesus  adjusted  his  words  to  what  he  sup- 
posed Nicodemus  kncAv,  or  at  least  might  be  supposed  to  knoAV. 
That  is,  in  addressing  Nico<lemus  he  really  spake  to  that  group  of 
ideas  and  sentiments  which  lay  in  the  mind  of  his  hearer. 

Coming  noAV  to  the  main  discussion  of  the  one  point  as  put 
above,  I  note — 

1.  That  Xieodemus  is  a  Jew;  therefore  Jesus  must  talk  as  to 


60  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— ClIAr.  III. 

a  Jew. Moreover,  Nicodemus  is  not  ouly  one  of  the  Jewish 

people,  but  is  a  member  of  the  highest  Jewish  council  (the  San- 
hedrim), and  therefore  by  profession  a  teacher — in  the  words  of 
Christ,  "the  master  [teacher]  of  Israel "  (v.  10).  As  such  the 
Old  Testament  was  his  text-book,  and  he  might  be  presumed  not 
only  to  understand  that  book  fairly,  but  to  be  able  to  teach  it  to 
others.  It  is  therefore  all  but  certain  that  Jesus  will  teach  him 
out  of  his  own  book;  will  assume  that  he  ought  to  understand 
that,  and  will  not  assume  that  he  ought  to  understand  what  that 
book  had  not  taught. 

2.  This  last  named  point  is  made  the  more  certain  because  Je- 
sus exjDresses  his  astonishment  that  Nicodemus,  being  the  teacher 
of  Israel,  (?'.  e.  one  of  the  prominent,  distinguished  teachers,) 
should  not  know  these  things.  In  his  view  it  was  not  only  mar- 
velous but  unpardonable  that  a  professed  teacher  of  the  Jewish 
scriptures  should  not  comprehend  the  plainly  taught  things  of 
his  own  book.  We  must  therefore  look  for  the  usage  of  tlie  term 
"  water"  in  the  Old  Testament.  As  we  meet  it  there,  is  it  bap- 
tism, or  is  it  simply  a  symbol  of  the  Spirit's  work?  We  will 
search  this  out  shortly. 

3.  The  first  and  most  fundamental  principle  of  interpretation 
being  this — that  "  usage  gives  law  to  language"  v,'e  are  compelled 
to  find  this  usage,  and  hence  its  behests,  in  what  j)recedes  rather 
than  what  follows.  Therefore  Jesus  must  have  spoken  according 
to  the  usage  of  the  Old  Testament  rather  than  of  the  New,  (the 
yet  unwritten  and  unknown  New,)  for  Nicodemus  could  not  be 
supposed  to  understand  the  New,  and  Jesus,  honestly  aiming  to 
teach  him,  must  begin  with  making  himself  understood,  and^must 
therefore  choose  his  words  accordingly.  Therefore  we  must  in- 
terpret the  words  of  Jesus  from  things  previously  known — not 
from  things  subsequently  revealed ;  i.  e.  we  must  find  the  usage, 
Avhich  gives  law  to  his  language  in  the  Old  Testament — not  in  the 
New;  in  the  teachings  and  symbols  of  the  old  economy,  and  not 
in  the  yet  undeveloped  institutions  [e.  g.  baptism]  and  their  ex- 
planations and  analogies  as  brought  out  only  in  the  later  gospel 
age. 

4.  Again:  As  the  phrase  "kingdom  of  God  "  or  "  of  heaven  " 
comes  from  Old  Testament  prophecy,  we  might  expect,  or  at  least 
we  might  hope,  to  find  the  terms  of  membership  there.  We  may 
at  least  say  that  as  the  kingdom  itself  is  an  Old  Testament  idea, 
expressed  in  Old  Testament  phrase,  so  should  the  conditions  of 
admission,  whether  found  in  the  Old  Testament  or  the  New,  be 
expressed  in  terms  familiar  to  a  good  student  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment scriptures. 

5.  Yet  again :  All  the  standard  terms  of  the  gospel  system  lie 
back  in  the  Old  Testament :  so  therefore  should  these  terms 
"water  and  Spirit,"  in  respect  to  regeneration.  In  the  Old  Testa- 
ment we  have  repentance  ;  we  have  faith,  belief,  trust;  we  have 
sacrifice  for  sins ;  redemption,  reconciliation,  pardon,  righteous- 
ness, atonement;  most  surely  then  we  have  a  right  to  look  there 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  111.  Gl 

for  the  now  heart  and  new  Spirit,  and  for  the  true  doctrine  of  tlio 
llolj  Spirit  of  God,  and  also  for  the  sense  of  "icalcr"  in  this 
connection. 

6.  Still  somewhat  more  definitely  let  it  he  said — The  doctrine  of 
the  Spirit  and  of  his  work  in  regeneration  is  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment as  really  as  in  the  New,  and  "water"  is  spoken  of  in  con- 
nection with  the  new  heart  as  really  there  as  in  this  conversation 
with  Nicodcmus.  Every  candid  reader  will  see  the  propriety 
therefore  of  referring  to  the  Old  Testament  for  the  true  expo.'^i- 
tion  of  this  word  "  water  "  in  connection  with  the  work  of  the 
Spirit  in  the  new  birth. 

7.  Advancing  yet  another  step — a  short  one  only — I  remark 
that  the  customary,  not  to  say  the  invariable,  symljol  under  which 
the  agency  of  the  Spirit  is  illustrated  in  the  Old  Testament  is 
"water."  David  has  the  idea  in  his  fifty-first  Psalm :  "Wash  me 
thoroughly  from  mine  iniquity  and  cleanse  me  from  my  sin;" 
"  Create  in  me  a  clean  heart;  "  "  Take  not  thy  Holy  Spirit  from 
me."  Isaiah  has  it  in  the  form  of  gospel  promise,  first  in  sjan- 
bol : — "  I  will  pour  water  upon  him  that  is  thirst}'',  and  floods  upon 
the  dry  ground;  " — then  in  the  thing  symbolized — "I  will  pour 
my  Spirit  upon  thy  seed  and  my  blessing  upon  thine  offspring  ;  " — 

and  "One  shall  say,  I  am  the  Lord's,^'  etc.  (Isa.  44:  3,  5). 

Joel  has  it  (2:  28,  29):  "  I  will  pour  out  my  Spirit"  [pozir,  as 
if  it  were  water]  "upon  all  flesh" — a  promise  which  Peter  saw 
fulfilled  incipiently  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  (Acts  2:  16-18). — 
In  Zechariah  the  reader  may  consult  chap.  13  :   1,  and  14:  8. 

In  Ezekiel  we  have  the  living  water  flowing  forth  from  under 
the  temple  (47:  1-12) — but  more  significant  than  all  the  I'est  is 
the  passage,  Ezck.  36:  25-27:  "Then  will  I  sprinkle  clean  water 
upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean  ;  from  all  your  filthiness  and 
from  all  your  idols  will  I  cleanse  you.  A  new  heart  also  will  1 
give  you,  and  a  new  spirit  will  1  put  within  you :  and  I  will  take 
away  the  stony  heart  out  of  your  flesh,  and  I  will  give  you  a  heart 
of  flesh.  And  I  will  put  my  Spirit  within  you,  and  cause  you  to 
walk  in  my  statutes,  and  ye  shall  keep  my  judgments  and  do  them." 

Here  Ave  have  in  one  group  all  the  leading  ideas  found  in  these 
words  of  Christ  to  Nicodemus  :■ — first  "  jvaier" — clean,  cleansing 
water,  sprinkled  and  cleansing  from  all  moral  filthiness ;  next, 
"the  new  heart  and  the  new  spirit"  given — which  is  precisely  re- 
generation; last,  the  recognition  of  "  the  Spirit  of  God  "  as  the  Su- 
preme Agent  whose  Avork  is  set  forth  by  the  symbol  of  cleansing 
water,  but  which  really  gives  the  new  heart  and  insures  the  ne^v 
moral  life:  "I  Avill  put  my  Spirit  within  you,  and  cause  you  to 
walk  in  ray  statutes.  ' 

It  admits  of  no  reasonable  doubt  that  Jesus  had  these  words  from 
Ezekiel  definitely  in  mind  when  he  said,  "  born  of  water  and 
Spirit."  In  each  passage — that  in  Ezekiel  and  this  in  Jesus  to 
Kicodemus — we  have  the  same  three  leading  ideas,  and  in  essen- 
tially the  same  order:  water;  the  new  heart  or  birth;  God's 
Spirit,  so  that  Avc  may  suppose  Jesus  to  have  almost  said  to  his 


G2  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CILVr.  III. 

pupil — that  "master  in  Israel" — "What!  hast  thou  never  read 
Ezekiel?  Hast  thou  possibly  forgotten  what  he  said  so  clearly 
about  '  clean  -water '  to  cleanse  from  all  iniquity ;  '  a  new  heart 
and  new  spirit; '  and  all  wrought  by  God's  own  Spirit  put  within 
the  souls  of  men?  " 

Let  me  turn  the  reader's  attention  yet  more  definitely  to  this 
point,  that  Jesus  uses  the  term  "  water  "  fur  a  "  catch-word,"  in  the 
good  sense  common  to  some  English  Expositors — i.  e.  a  suggest- 
ive word  which  will  "catch"  the  hearers  ear  and  lead  his  mind 
into  the  desired  line  of  thought.  Thus  the  word  "water"  would 
naturally  suggest  to  Xicodemus  this  very  passage  in  Ezekiel — not 
to  say  also,  numerous  other  Old  Testament  passages  in  which 

Avater  symbolizes  the  Spirit's  agency  in  the  hearts  of  men. 

This  explains  sufficiently  why  Jesus  puts  "water"  first  in  order; 
also  why  he  names  it  once,  and  once  onlj'' — i.  e.  not  as  being 
itself  one  of  the  agents  in  regeneration,  but  as  suggesting  the  Old 
Testament  passages  which  speak  of  tlie  Spirit  under  the  symbol 
of  water. 

Thus  it  seems  to  admit  really  of  no  question  that  Jesus,  follow- 
ing Old  Testament  usage,  speaks  of  water  as  a  symbol  of  the 
Holy  Spirit's  renewing,  heart-cleansing  agency  in  regeneration. 

8.  But  over  against  this,  let  it  be  carefully  considered — Bap- 
tism is  not  in  the  Old  Testament  at  all.  The  word  in  its  Chris- 
tian sense  is  not  there.  Therefore  Jesus  could  not  assume  that 
Nicodemus  ought  to  have  found  and  learned  it  there.  To  have 
assumed  this,  and  to  have  reproached  Nicodemus  for  being  "a 
master  in  Israel,"  and  yet  for  not  having  learned  fro6i  the  Old 
Testament  what  was  never  there,  is  to  make  the  rebuke  recoil 
upon  its  author — the  blessed  Jesus!  Whose  heart  docs  not  ex- 
claim, "God  forbid!" 

9  Yet  further :  It  is  entirely  too  early  for  Jesus  to  speak  of 
Christian  baptism.  Christian  baptism  made  very  special  account 
of  the  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  for  John  the  Baptist  puts  his 
baptism  in  contrast  with  it,  saying — "I  indeed  baptize  with  wa- 
ter; but  he  that  cometh  after  me   shall  baptize  with  the  Holy 

Ghost." At  the  time  of   this  discourse  with  Nicodemus,  the 

doctrine  of  the  Spirit  was  but  pfvrtially  unfolded.  No  command 
had  yet  gone  forth  to  "  baptize  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  and 
of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  In  fiict  this  command  which 
was  legitimately  the  very  institution  of  Christian  baptism,  dates 

only  after  Christ's  resurrection. Now,  therefore,  if  it  be  said 

that  Jesus  used  the  words — "born  of  water  and  Spirit" — with 
reference  to  Christian  baptism,  Nicodemus  might  have  replied — 
"Rabbi,  even  thy  disciples  have  not  heard  yet  of  baptizing  into 
the  name  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  how  then  dost  thou  reproach  me 

for  not  understanding  it?" The  reader  will  the  more  surely  see 

the  force  of  my  argument  here  if  he  will  consider  that  if  "  water" 
here  means  baptism,  it  must  mean  bajDtism  in  its  closest  ])ossible 
relations  to  the  Holy  Ghost  and  to  his  regenerating  work.  To 
sujipose  otherwise  is  to  rule  out  the  great  Christian  element  of 


GOSPEL  OF  JOUN.— CHAP.  III.  G3 

baptism  ;  degrade  it  to  a  thing  of  mere  water;  and  virtually  sub- 
vert the  whole  gospel  of  salvation. But  to  interpret  baptism 

here  of  its  special  significance  as  related  to  the  Holy  Ghost  is  to 
interpret  quite  ahead  of  dates. 

If  it  be  objected  that  Jesus  had  already  begun  to  baptize,  even 
this  objection  is  not  altogether  felicitous,  for  we  are  told  that  Je- 
sus did  not  himself  baptize,  but  passed  it  over  to  the  hands  of 
his  disciples.  This  certainly  does  not  look  as  if  Jesus  attached 
supreme  importance  to  baptism — does  not  imply  that  he  deemed 
it  essential  to  admission  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  or  that  in 
his  view  the  grace  of  regeneration  came  always  with  water-bap- 
tism, and  never  without  it.  If  these  had  been  his  views,  he  could 
have  spared  no  pains  to  make  the  administration  impressively 
solemn;  he  could  not  have  stood  aloof  personally  from  its  admin- 
istration and  left  it  in  the  hands  of  novices — for  such  were  his 
young  disciples — at  this  time  less  than  one  year  in  his  training 
school. 

10.  If  in  this  passage  "  water"  is  interpreted  to  mean  baptism, 
it  springs  upon  us  several  questions  of  momentous  bearing,  e.  g. 
Is  baptism  really  vital  to  salvation,  as  ti'uly  so  as  being  "  born  of 
the  Spirit"  ?  Is  it  vital  by  virtue  of  what  is  in  itself,  or  only  be- 
cause of  its  relation  to  the  Spirit  ?  Does  baptism  certainly  and 
necessarily  involve  the  birth  by  the  Spirit?  If  not,  then  what  is 
the  state  of  one  born  of  water  and  not  "  born  of  the  Spirit "  ? 
And  a^^ain,  what  of  him  "  born  of  the  Spirit"  and  not  "  born  of 

water '  ? Now  observe  :   under  this  interpretation  these  vital 

questions  are  sprung  upon  us  and  then  left  ntterli/  without  solu- 
tion. Not  a  ray  of  light  is  thrown  upon  them.  Jesus  passes 
them  all  as  if  nobody  could  ever  raise  them  or  be  troubled  about 
them.  But  they  will  come  up,  and  they  must  be  met.  If  by 
"  water"  Jesus  means  baptism,  he  gives  no  light  upon  them  what- 
ever. All  is  left  loose,  indefinite,  perplexing,  bewildering,  and 
the  more  solemnly  in  earnest  we  are  to  understand  fully  all  the 
real  conditions  of  salvation,  the  more  agonizing  becomes  our  per- 
plexity. 

Such  results  from  interpreting  this  loord  "loater"  to  mean 
baptism  are  utterly  fatal  to  the  interpretation  which  evolves  and 
creates  them.  For  this  is  never  the  way  of  God's  teaching  in  the 
Bible — is  never  the  way  of  Christ's  opening  the  door  into  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  Woe  to  all  honest  inquirers  after  the  way 
of  salvation  if  it  were  ! 

The  considerations  already  advanced  are  amply  sufficient  to 
prove  that  "water"  is  here  only  a  symbol  of  the  Spirit's  cleans- 
ing agency,  and  has  no  reference  to  baptism  as  a  visible,  external 
rite.  Several  of  them  would  be  decisive  alone,  in  their  individ- 
ual force ;  combined,  they  seem  to  me  resistless. 

11.  Bat  there  are  still  other  arguments  ;  e.  g.  this :  If  Jesus  meant 
baptism,  and  not  water,  why  did  he  not  say  baptism  ?  He  might 
have  used  the  word  baptism  as  easily  as  the  word  water,  and  so  have 
lifted  his  words  above  all  the  darkness  of  ambiguity  and  doubt. 


G4  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAr.  III. 

12.  A.i^ain:  If  he  meant  baptism,  then  he  made  iico  conditions 
of  admission  into  the  kingdom  of  God.  But  in  v.  6  he  seems  to 
forget  that  there  are  two  conditions,  and  speaks  as  if  there  Avere 
but  one — being  "born  of  the  Spirit." 

13.  Yet  again:  If  baptism  be  one  of  the  conditions,  distinct 
from  the  Spirit,  then  he  assigns  it  the  first  place ;  puts  it  in  the 
foreground :  how  then  could  he  ignore  it  altogether  throughout 
the  remaining  portion  of  this  discourse,  and  indeed  throughout 
all  his  future  instructions  ?  How  can  we  account  for  it  that  Je- 
sus never  again  brings  up  this  doctrine  to  reassert  or  expound 
it;  that  never  one  of  his  disciples  preached — never  one  of  his 
apostles  wrote — that  men  must  be  baptized  or  never  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  God? 

It  is  hoped  that  these  considerations,  combining  and  massing 
their  forces,  will  suffice  to  prove  that  "water"  here  is  not  ba}> 
tism,  but  is  only  a  sym])ol — borrowed  from  the  Old  Testament — 
of  the  cleansing,  renewing  agency  of  the  Spirit  in  the  new  birth. 

A  word  is  perhaps  due  in  reply  to  one  single  objection,  put  by 
those  expositors  Avho  make  large  account  of  grammatical  usage. 
They  say  that  the  figure  known  as  "  llendiadys  "  {i.  e.  two  words 
for  one  idea)  by  which  the  words  "water  and  Spirit"  come  to 
mean  the  water  or  washing  of  the  Sjnrit,  is  not  avcII  supported 
by  Greek  usage,  and  is  therefore  to  be  rejected  in  this  passage. 

My  brief  reply  to  this  objection  is  that  in  this  passage  Jesus 
does  not  concern  himself  so  much  with  Greek  usage  as  with  tho 
usage  of  Ezekiel  in  his  passage  quoted  above,  aljiout  the  "new 
heart."  He  spake  with  those  words  in  his  eye;  says  "water" 
because  Ezekiel  does,  and  Spirit  because  Ezekiel  docs ;  and  puts 
the  ideas  represented  by  these  w<n-ds  into  their  place  in  connection 
with  the  "new  heart"  because  Ezekiel  does,  and  because  Nico- 
demus  ought  to  understand  these  words  and  this  sense  of  them. 
Hence  we  have  not  the  least  occasion  to  trouble  ourselves  over  the 
question  of  Greek  usage  here.  Old  Testament  usage  in  a  case  of 
this  sort  ought  to  be  si>preme. 

Some  of  my  readers  will  recall  the  fact  without  mj  aid — that 
the  doctrine  of  "  baptismal  regeneration"  rests  upon  this  passage 
only,  assuming  that  "water"  here  is  baptism,  and  that  regenera- 
tion goes  with  baptism,  and  not  without  it.  Consequently  infants, 
duly  baptized,  are  therein  regenerated.  Some  of  the  early 
Christian  fathers  Avrote  in  this  way  of  "  baptismal  regeneration  " — 
"  regeneration  in  the  Avatcr  of  baptism,"  etc. 

But  if  "water"  is  here  only  a  symbol  of  the  Spirit's  cleansing, 
and  is  not  baptism  at  all,  then  the  Avhole  doctrine  of  "  baptismal 
regeneration"  is  a  fancy  only,  and  has  no  scriptural  foundation. 
False  interpretations  of  woi'ds  found  in  the  Bible  have  no  more 
force  than  neAV  words  foisted  into  the  Bible  Avould  have.  The  true 
sense  of  the  Avords  of  Jesus  is  all  that  Jesus  said.  Any  other 
supposed  meaning  which  can  not  l)e  legitimately  put  upon  his 
words  is  utterly  Avithout  his  authority'. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOIL^.— CHAP.  III.  65 

7,  ]\Iarvel  not  tlxat  I  said  unto  tliec,  Ye  must  be  born 
again. 

8*.  The  wind  blowcth  where  it  listeth,  and  thou  liearest 
the  sound  thereof,  but  canst  not  tell  whence  it  cometh,  and 
whither  it  goeth :  so  is  every  one  that  is  born  of  the  Spirit. 

In  the  kindness  and  compassion  of  his  heart  Jesus  fears  that 
a  sense  of  the  marvelous,  excited  by  what  seemed  strange  and 
incomprelicnsible,  is  counteracting  the  moral  impression  of  his 
words — "Ye  must  be  born  from  above."  Hence  this  caution; 
and  hence  also  this  analogy  between  the  Spirit's  agency  and  the 
gentle  breeze — designed  to  suggest  that  mystery  may  overhang 
the  philosophy  of  the  commonest  facts  of  human  life.  This  anal- 
ogy was  the  more  suggestive  because  the  same  Greek  word  is 
.used  both  for  "Spirit"  in  the  sense  of  the  Heavenly  Agent,  and 
for  "wind"  as  here  said  to  blow — breathe  gently — where  it  will. 
Of  these  gentle  zephyrs  jon  hear  their  sound  (literally  "tbeir 
voice"),  but  they  never  report  whence  they  come  or  whither  they 
go.  So  there  are  untold,  unrevealed  things  concerning  the  new 
birth  by  the  Spirit.  Do  not  doubt  or  in  any  wise  disparage  the 
glorious  truth  because  some  things  about  it  lie  shaded  in  mys- 
tery. 

9.  Nicodemus  answered  and  said  unto  him,  How  can 
these  things  be? 

Sad  to  say,  Nicodemus  is  still  snagged  where  he  was  before : — ■ 
"l£oio  can  these  things  be?"  And  how  can  I  be  born  again  if 
1  can  not  understand  it  ? 

10.  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him,  Art  thou  a  master 
of  Israel,  and  knowest  not  these  things? 

Is  there  in  these  words  a  slight  under-tone  of  impatience, 
moving  the  Lord  to  this  gentle  rebuke — Art  thou  the  professed 
teacher  of  spiritual  things  in  Israel  [the  Greek  has  the  article 
i/ie] — one  of  the  distinguished  doctors  of  the  law,  and  yet  hast 
never  read,  or  at  least  never  understood  what  is  so  plainly  said 
there  of  the  "new  heart  and  new  spirit" — the  work  of  the 
Spirit  of  God,  symbolized  by  cleansing  water  ? 

11.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee,  We  speak  that  we  do 
know,  and  testify  that  we  have  seen ;  and  ye  receive  not  our 
witness. 

12.  If  I  have  told  you  earthly  things,  and  ye  believe 
not,  how  shaU  ye  believe,  if  I  tell  you  of  heavenly  things? 

13.  And  no  man  hath  ascended  up  to  heaven,  but  he 
that  came  down  from  heaven,  even  the  Son  of  man  wdiich  is 
in  heaven. 

In  saying  "  we,"  Jesus  may  perhaps  include  with  himself  his 


66  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  III. 

disciples,  yet  no  special  stress  should  be  laid  on  the  plural,  for 
in  vs.  12,  13,  he  speaks  of  himself  only. 

Jesus  would  say  to  'ISicodemus — There  are  things  in  the  great 
realm  of  divine  truth  vrhich  you  must  receive  vj^on  testimony.  V 
know  what  I  affirm;  I  testify  only  what  I  have  myself  seen: 
why  should  not  you  receive  my  testimony?     Yet  you  refuse  it. 

In  V.  12  "If  I  have  told  you,"  is  equivalent  to  this:  Inasimich 
as  I  have — assuming  that  he  has,  and  not  making  the  supposi- 
tion of  what  would  be  if  he  should.  This  usage  of  the  word  "  if" 
is  not  infrequent  in  John. This  verse  brings  up  the  ques- 
tion— What   things   are   spoken   of   as   "earthly"   and  what    as 

"heavenly"? Some  have  answered:    The   former  are  things 

material;  the  latter  arc  things  spiritual.  But  this  sense  seems 
to  me  quite  inept  and  not  pertinent  to  the  issues  pending  here. 

Others  have  said:  The  "earthly"  are  things  done  here  on 

the  earth;  the  "heavenly"  are  done  in  heaven,  or  at  least,  their 

working  forces  originate  there  and  come  down  from  thence. 

This  explanation  comes  nearer  to  the  truth,  yet  still  falls  short 
of  it.  1  suggest  that  light  on  this  subject  may  come  from  two 
quarters. — — («•)  1'he  "earthly  things"  are  those  which  Jesus 
had  told  Nicodemus,  yet  which  he  would  not  believe;  while 
the  "  heavenly"  were  those  which  Nicodemus  demanded  to  know, 
but  which  Jesus  implies  that  he  would  not  believe  if  he  were 
told  them — probably  would  find  even  more_  stubbornly  incred- 
ible because  apparently  more  impossible.  In  the  former  class 
we  may  put  the  fact  of  the  new  birth  and  its  absolute  7ieccs- 
sity ;  in  the  latter,  the  great  question  which  so  perplexed  Nico- 
demus:— IIow  can  it  bef     How  can  it  be  done?     The  mystery 

of  the  Spirit's  agency. (6.)  It  is  legitimate  to  fall  back  upon 

that  Old  Testament  usage  which  speaks  of  things  easy  of  ap- 
prehension as  "earthly;'  and  of  things  difficult  of  apprehension 
as  being  "heavenly" — remote,  too  far  away  to  be  seen  or  learned 
by  mortals.  We  find  this  usage  first  in  Moses  (Dent.  30:  11-14), 
but  appeai'ing  again  in  Paul  to  the  Romans  (10:  6-10):  "This 
commandment  which  I  command  thee  this  day  is  not  hidden 
from  thee,  neither  is  it  far  off.  It  is  not  in  heaven  that  thou 
shouldest  say.  Who  shall  go  up  for  us  to  heaven  and  bring  it  unto 
VIS  that  we  may  hear  it  and  do  it?  Neither  is  it  beyond  the  sea 
that  thou  shouldest  say.  Who  shall  go  over  the  sea  for  us  and 
bring  it  unto  us  that  we  may  hear  it  and  do  it?  But  the  word 
is  very  nigh  unto  thee,  in  thy  mouth  and  in  thy  heart,  that  thou 

mayest   do   it." Paul   applies    this   usage   beautifully   to   the 

"righteousness  of  faith" — a  thing  so  simple  and  so  easily  appre- 
hended that  no  one  need  say  in  his  heart — "Who  shall  go  up  into 
heaven  for  us  to  bring  Christ  down  to  us"  that  we  may  under- 
stand him?  or  who  shall  descend  into  the  deep  as  if  to  bring 
up  Christ  from  the  shades  below?  "But  what  saith  it?  The  word 
is  nigh  thee" — plain,  simple,  easy  of  apprehension: — for  it  is 
only  to  "confess  with  thy  mouth  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  believe  in 
thy  heart  that  God  hath  raised  him  from  the  dead;  and  thou  shalt 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  III.  67 

be  saved." FoUowina;  this  ancient  Jewish  usage  we  put  into 

tlie  class  of  "earthly  things"  the  simple  plain  facts  of  the  new 
birth  which  Jesus  had  announced — e.  g.  that  it  is  Avrought  by  the 
Spirit,  his  agency  being  symbolized  as  in  the  Old  Testament  by 
cleansing  water;  and  that  this  morally  new  birth  is  the  vital 
prerequisite  for  admission  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  We  put 
into  the  class  of  "heavenly  things"  those  laws  of  the  Spirit's 
agency  which  no  human  ken  has  searched  out,  involved  in  the 
question — ''How  can  these  things  be  done?"  and  suggested  by  Je- 
sus in  his  analogy  of  the  Spirit  to  the  winds  that  blow,  but  come, 
Ave  know  not  whence,  and  go,  we  know  not  whither.  These 
points  Jesus  did  not  propose  to  reveal,  assured  that  Xicodemus 
would  not  believe  these  inasmuch  as  he  hesitates  to  believe  the 
far  more  plain  and  simple  points  already  solemnly  affirmed. 

V.  13  follows  Ity  natural  association  from  the  usage  of  Closes 
and  of  Paul  which  speaks  of  "  going  up  to  heaven"  to  get 
knoAvledge  that  is  too  deep  and  vast  to  be  found  on  earth.  No 
man  goes  up  to  heaven  to  get  this  deep  knowledge  of  the  things 
of  the  new  birth;  but  the  Son  of  man  comes  down  from  heaven, 
and  therefore  is  entirely  competent  to  teach  all  the  most  abstruse 

things  of  the  realm  of  truth. The  words — "  The  Son  of  man 

who  is  in  heaven" — seem  to  recognize  the  relation  of  the  Logos 
to  the  Father  to  be  equivalent  to  his  constantly  abiding  in 
heaven.  Eternally  with  God,  and  indeed  being  in  no  respect  less 
than  God,  he  knows  God  and  all  the  deepest  things  of  the  heavenly 
world,  even  as  if  he  were  d^velling  forever  there.* 

14.  And  as  Moses  lifted  up  the  serpent  in  tlie  wilderness, 
even  so  must  the  Son  of  man  be  lifted  up: 

15,  That  who-soever  believeth  in  him  should  not  perish, 
but  have  eternal  life. 

By  the  delicate  law  of  mental  association  of  ideas,  the  lifting 
up  of  the  serpent  and  the  analogous  lifting  up  of  the  Son  of  man 
upon  the  cross  may  have  been  suggested  by  the  ascaid'mg  vp  to 
heaven  to  get  truth  which  is  too  far  from  human  reach  to  be 
grasped  below. 

Let  us  note,  moreover,  that  this  allusion  to  Moses  and  the  ser- 
pent in  the  wilderness  is  doubly  pertinent  in  a  discourse  with 
Nicodemus,  because  it  comes  from  his  own  test-book.  There  lay 
in  it  a  most  significant  foreshadowing — first,  of  the  lifting  up  of 
Jesus  upon  the  cross ;  next,  of  the  looking  up  to  him  by  faith  for 
life  by  every  soul  stung  with  conscious  guilt,  and  verily  lost  under 
the  doom  of  condemnation  from  God.  The  looking  up  to  that  ujv 
lifted  serpent  was  in  its  nature,  faith  ;  the  looking  up  to  the  Cruci- 
fied One  is  definitely  called  believing  in  him,  and  is  coupled  with 
the  promise,  not  of  the  life  of  the  body  for  a  few  days  or  years 
longer  as  in  the  case  of  the  serpent-bitten  men,  but  with  the  prom- 

*  The  old  manuscripts  (S.  V.)  omit  the  words — "  who  is  in  heaven." 
Tisclicndorfj  however,  retains  them. 


08  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  III. 

ise  of  life  eternal — a  life  of  restoration  to  God  and  of  everlasting 

peace  in  his  presence  and  favor. Let  it  be  noted  that  Christ's 

■R-ay  of  speakina;  of  himself  as  to  he  "lifted  np  "  {i.  e.  on  the 
cross)  seems  to  have  made  a  deep  impression  on  the  mind  of 
John.  He  remembered  and  put  on  record  two  other  references 
to  the  same  fact,  in  the  same  words :  "  Then  said  Jesus  unto  them, 
When  ye  have  lifted  up  the  Son  of  man,  then  shall  ye  know  that 
I  am  he,"  etc.  (John  8:  28).  Also  this:  "And  I,  if  I  be  lifted 
up,  -will  draAV  all  men  unto  me  ;  "  which  John  explains  : — "  This 
he  said,  signifying  what  death  he  should  die  "  (John  12 :  32,  33). 

Thus  Jesus  led  Nicodemus  along  into  the  great  things  of  the 

gospel  system — the  sacrificial  death  of  the  Son  of  man  upon  the 
cross,  and  the  looking  up  to  him  thus  crucified,  as  the  world's 
(ireat  Sufferer,  wdio  bore  our  sins  in  his  own  body  on  the  tree — to 
luok  unto  whom  by  faith  is  to  live  eternally. 

We  shall  miss  much  of  the  beauty  of  these  verses  (14-21)  if 
Ave  overlook  (as  some  readers  do)  the  fact  that  we  are  still  listen- 
ing to  Jesus  in  his  night  conversation  with  Nicodemus.  How 
kindly  and  yet  how  briefly,  in  most  comprehensive  words,  does 
Jesus  lead  his  pupil  on  into  the  great  elementary  things  of  the 
gospel  scheme !  * 

16.  For  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  be- 
gotten Son,  that  whosoever  believetlir in  him  should  not  per- 
ish, but  have  everlasting  life. 

17.  For  God  sent  not  his  Son  into  tlie  world  to  condemn 
the  world ;  but  that  the  world  through  him  might  be  saved. 

Moving  forward  in  his  discourse  logically  ("for"),  his  next 
point  naturally  is  to  trace  this  scheme  of  sa,lvation  for  lost  men 
to  its  source  in  the  deep,  eternal,  absolutely  infinite  love  of  God 
for  this  lost  world.  If  Nicodemus  may  be  supposed  to  have  un- 
derstood to  some  extent  the  deep  significance  of  "  the  Son  of  man 
lifted  up  "  upon  the  cross — dying  in  torture  that  guilty  men  might 
have  life  by  looking  unto  him,  we  might  expect  another  exclamation 
like  the  former — "  Hoav  can  these  things  be !  "  Was  ever  such  a  sac- 
rifice of  dear  life  made  for  one's  guilty  enemies  ?  And  how  is  it 
possible  that  God  should  give  up  his  Son  to  such  a  death  ?  An- 
ticipating this  new  marvel,  Jesus  by  one  word  lets  in  a  flood  of 
light  from  heaven  upon  it :  "  For  God  so  loved  the  world  " — loved 
the  world  with  love  so  pure,  so  unselfish,  so  self-sacrificing — that 
he  gave  up  the  only-begotten  Son,f  in  order  that  no  believer  in 

"*  In  V.  15  the  text  corrected  upon  the  authority  of  the  Sinaitic  and 
the  Vatican,  omits  the  words — "not  perish,  but" — reading  the  pas- 
sage thus :  "  "Whosoever  believeth  in  him  should  have  eternal  life." 
It  is  supposahle  that  they  were  introduced  here  by  some  copyist  be- 
cause he  found  them  in  v.  16. 

t"  TJie  only-begotten  Son  "  is  the  reading  best  supported. 


GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  III.  69 

Ilim  should  perish,  hut  every  such  one  should  liavc  eternal 
life.* 

In  verse  17  we  have  a  slight  advance  in  the  glorious  gospel  doc- 
trine— the  great  purpose  of  God  in  sending  his  Son  into  this  re- 
bellious vk'orld  being  put  in  its  negative  side  as  ■well  as  its  positive 
side.  You  might  anticipate  that  the  Great  King,  sending  his 
royal  Sou  into  a  revolted  province,  vFOuld  commission  him  only  to 
subdue  and  destroy;  but  so  thinking,  you  would  utterly  miscon- 
ceive the  mission  of  the  Son  of  God.  For  God  did  not  send  him 
to  wield  Heaven's  exterminating  thunders,  nor  to  sit  in  righteous 
judgment  unto  eternal  condemnation,  but  that  the  world  through 
him  might  be  saved.  The  world's  salvation — not  its  damnation — 
was  the  declared  purpose,  the  sublime  design,  of  this  wonderful 
mission. 

We  should  wrest  this  scripture  to  our  sore  damage  if  we  were 
to  push  it  so  that  it  should  deny  the  doctrine,  elsewhere  revealed, 
of  Q.  future  judgment,  to  be  administered  by  "the  Son  of  man." 
The  two  doctrines  are  in  no  respect  self-conflicting.  The  first 
coming  of  Jesus  is  for  salvation,  the  second  for  judgment.  The 
first  provides  and  ofi'ers  a  free  salvation  to  all  men  whosoever  will; 
the  second  brings  before  the  "great  white  throne"  of  judgment 
the  whole  race  of  men  to  award  their  righteous  doom  to  all  those 
whom  no  mercy  could  save  ;  whom  no  offers  of  pardon  could  move 
to  accept  it ;  whom  no  long-suffering  and  no  beseechings  of  love 
have  ever  availed  to  bring  to  repentance  and  to  faith  in  an  offered 
Redeemer. 

18.  He  that  belie veth  on  him  is  not  condemned :  but  he 
that  belie  veth  not  is  condemned  already,  because  he  hath  not 
believed  in  the  name  of  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God. 

This  verse  expands  moi'e  fully  the  thought  of  the  last  clause  "in 
V.  16 — the  truth  that  whoever  believes  in  Christ  shall  have  eternal 
life.  So  Jesus  here  puts  first  the  case  of  the  believer.  He  is  not 
condemned  but  pardoned,  and  therefore  saved.  Then  on  the  other 
side  the  case  of  him  who  believes  not :  he  is  condemned  already 
because  he  does  not  believe  in  the  name  of  the  only-begotten  Son 
of  God. 

Here  the  main  point  of  inquiry  exegetically  will  be  brought  out 
by  the  question — "  Condemned  already,"  for  what  sin?  Is  it  for 
the  one  sin  of  unbelief ;  or  for  the  sins  of  his  whole  life,  for  which 
no  pardon  has  come,  or  can  come  while  he  will  not  believe  in  Jesus  ? 
Either  of  these  views  is  in  itself  admissible — i.  e.  is  true  ;  but  the 
scope  of  the  passage  seems  to  me  to  favor  the  former.  Jesus  seems 
to  speak  here  as  if  in  his  thought  the  whole  issue  between  saved 

*Ia  the  last  clause  of  each  verse  (15  and  16)  "eternal"  and 
"everlasting"  (as  in  ^latt.  25:  46)  are  used  interchangeably  to 
translate  the  same  Greek  word  ^' aionios."  It  is  unfortunate  that  re- 
gard to  euphony  should  have  led  our  translators  to  violate  the  best 
rule  of  translation — the  same  English  word  for  its  equivalent  Greek. 
4 


70  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  III. 

Jind  lost  turned  on  the  one  point — believing  or  not  believing  in  the 
name  of  the  Son  of  God — every  believer  being  saved ;  every 
unbeliever  lost.  Other  sins  besides  this  one  of  unbelief  are  com- 
paratively of  no  account  as  bearing  on  the  question  of  ultimate 
salvation,  for  all  else  can  be  forgiven ;  but  the  sin  of  unbelief  in 
God's  offered  Son  must  of  necessity  be  fatal  to  salvation,  because 
it  puts  the  soul  beyond  the  pale  of  mercy;  debars  the  sinner  from 
the  possibility  of  pardon;  practically  nullifies,  as  to  the  man  Avho 
will  not  believe  in  Jesus,  all  that  God  in  his  great  mercy  has  pro- 
vided for  human  salvation. 

If  this  exposition  of  the  thought  of  Jesus  in  this  passage  be  just, 
it  will  be  readily  seen  that  in  his  view  every  man's  eternal  destiny 
turns  on  the  single  point — gospel  faith,  or  gospel  unbelief.  This 
point  is  lifted  into  a  prominence  which  towers  high  above  every 
thing  else.  It  is  not  surprising  therefore  that  he  should  proceed 
to  show  how  unbelief  roots  itself  vitally  in  the  love  of  man's  heart 
for  sin,  and,  consequently,  for  the  darkness  which  perverts  his 
views  of  truth — as  we  shall  see. 

19.  And  this  is  the  condemnation,  that  light  is  come  into 
the  world,  and  men  loved  darkness  rather  than  light,  because 
their  deeds  were  evil. 

20.  For  every  one  that  doeth  evil  hateth  the  light,  neither 
Cometh  to  the  light,  lest  his  deeds-should  he  reproved. 

21.  But  he  that  doeth  truth  cometh  to  the  light,  that  his 
deeds  may  be  made  manifest,  that  they  are  wrought  in  God. 

Here  gospel  unbelief  is  traced  philosophically  to  "  evil  deeds  " — 
which  if  a  man  will  justify  and  will  not  forsake,  he  must  needs 
cover  them  as  best  he  can  wiili  darlcness.  Hence  he  will  love 
darkness  rather  than  light.  He  comes  to  have  a  personal  interest 
in  darkness,  since  it  is  only  by  its  help  that  he  can  make  himself 
at  all  comfortable  in  sinning.  It  is  the  perpetual  annoyance  of 
sinners  that  God  has  made  them  with  a  moral  sense  which  con- 
demns sin — which  insists  upon  witnessing  against  sin  as  wrong, 
base,  unworthy  of  a  moral  being.  This  witnessing  testimony  of 
his  own  conscience  the  sinner  must  in  some  way  withstand.  How 
shall  he  do  it?     Shall  he  bribe  the  witness,  or  muzzle  his  lips,  or 

mystify  his  points,  or  stop  his  own  ears  ? In  the  Avords  before 

us,  the  Great  Teacher  treats  the  case  with  beautiful  yet  rich  sim- 
plicity. Truth  is  light — truth  being  to  the  mind  what  light  is  to 
the  body.  This  light  of  moral  sort  God  has  brought  into  the 
world.  In  his  power  of  moral  choices  man  has  his  option  to  come 
or  not  to  come  to  this  light.  If  he  loves  light,  he  comes ;  if  he 
loves  darkness  rather,  he  hates  the  light  and  will  not  come.  Of 
course  he  will  love  darkness  if  his  deeds  are  deeds  of  darkness, 
such  as  can  not  bear  the  light.  The  philosophy  of  this  is  almost 
too  simple  to  be  made  more  plain  by  analysis  or  exposition.  As 
long  as  a  man  proposes  to  continue  in  sin,  he  will  vindicate  his 
former  sinning  self  so  far  as  he  can,  and  will  labor  to  make  his 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  iir.  71 

sins  appear  ti-ivial,  i.  e.  lie  will  shut  off  the  light,  will  dread  its 
revelations  ;  will  hate  it  and  will  not  come  up  to  it  lest  it  make  his 

litb  and  his  soul  unendurably  odious. On  the  other  hand,  if  a 

man  live  up  to  his  moral  convictions; — in  the  words  of  Jesus,  if 
he  "  doeth  trutli,"  then  he  will  come  to  the  light,  and  you  may  at 
once  see  that  his  doings  arc  manifestly  "  icrovglit  in  God" — the 
deeds  of  a  soul  new-born  to  God  with  that  birth  which  is  by  the 
Spirit. 

The  ultimate  doctrine  reached  by  this  philosophy  of  gospel  faith 
and  unbelief  is  that  both  have  their  roots  rather  in  the  heart  than 
in  thft  head,  since  gospel  faith  wells  up  spontaneously  in  the  heart 
that  loves  purity  and  truth  ;  while  gospel  unbelief  has  its  roots  and 
impulses  in  cherished  sin  and  in  the  darkness  which  brings  the 

only  comfort  to  a  persistent  sinner. We  reach  essentially  the 

same  result  when  we  say  that  repentance  naturally  goes  before 
gospel  faith,  and  impenitence  as  to  sin  begets  gospel  unbelief;  for 
when  a  man  turns  against  his  former  sinning  self,  he  begins  to 
welcome  the  light  of  truth  ;  he  gladly  comes  to  it;  gladly  hails  the 
lielp  the  gospel  brings,  and  opens  his  soul  to  the  peace  and  joy  of 
Christ's  salvation.  But  so  long  as  any  man  persists  in  sin  he 
keeps  himself  under  the  strongest  temptation  to  justify  sinning — 
for  which  the  only  available  means  are  to  shut  off  God's  light,  and 
to  make  a  covenant  with  darkness. 

AVhen  Christ  said  to  Nicodemus  (v.  19)  "light  is  come  into  the 
world,"  we  must  suppose  him  to  refer  to  his  own  coming  from 
heaven  to  earth  with  the  light  of  salvation;  as  said  (1:9)  "This 
was  the  true  light  which  coming  into  the  world,  enlightens  every 
man."  Thus  Jesus  would  press  it  upon  Nicodemus  that  the  one 
supreme  ground  of  condemnation — the  great  damning  sin — is,  re- 
pelling the  light  of  heaven  which  the  Son  of  God,  becoming  in- 
carnate in  human  flesh,  came  to  reveal. 

Contemplating  this  conversation  with  Nicodemus  as  a  whole, 
we  are  impressed  with  its  simplicity,  its  directness,  and  the  com- 
prehensiveness with  which  Jesus  puts  before  his  pupil  the  vital 
truths  of  the  gospel.  With  what  concentration  of  truth  and  mo- 
tive does  he  bring  every  thing  to  bear  upon  the  one  great  point — 
believing  on  the  name  of  the  Son  of  God!  We  can  almost  see 
him  throw  his  loving  arms  around  the  old  man,  saying  with  sol- 
emnly tender  tone  and  flowing  tears — If  you  will  only  break  off 
your  sins  by  righteousness  ;  cease  to  love  darkness  for  the  sake 
of  self-justification  in  evil  ways,  and  thus  open  your  soul  to  the 
light  of  God,  and  come  in  the  spirit  of  a  child  to  believe  in  that 
Son  of  God  for  pardon  and  life,  how  will  your  soul  rest  in  the 
peace  of  God  that  passeth  all  understanding ! 

22.  After  these  thing.s  came  Jesus  and  his  disciples  into 
the  land  of  Jiidea  ;  and  there  he  tarried  with  them,  and  bap- 
tized. 

The  second  portion  of  this  chapter,  opening  here,  brings  Jesus 


72  GOSPEL  OF  J01L\.— CHAP.  III. 

for  the  last  time  into  contact  with  John  the  Baptist,  and  records 
the  final  testimony  of  the  Bajitist  in  hehalf  of  Jesus  as  the  Messiah. 
If  we  inquire  for  the  supposable  reason  why  Jesus  went  from 
the  city  of  Jerusalem  into  the  country — Judea — to  preach,  we 
have  it  probably  in  the  two  facts — that  the  bigotry  and  pride  of 
the  Pharisees  were  most  virulent  and  hostile  in  the  city — less  so 
in  the  country;  and  that  John's  preparatory  work,  preaching  re- 
pentance and  awakening  expectation  of  a  Savior  near,  had  been  by 
far  most  effective  in  the  country.  It  was  wise  that  Jesus  availed 
himself  of  these  preparatory  labors  of  his  Great  Forerunner. 

23.  And  John  also  was  baptizing  in  JSnon  near  to  Salim, 
because  there  was  much  water  there:  and  they  came,  and 
were  baptized. 

John  the  Baptist  was  also  baptizing  at  a  point  so  near  that  his 
disciples  were  cognizant  of  the  work  Jesus  was  doing. 

The  precise  locality  of  -^non  and  Salim  is  still  uncertain,  the 
best  authorities  favoring  either  a  point  six  miles  south  of  Scy- 
thopolis  (Bethshean),  or  a  point  some  five  miles  north-east  from 
Jerusalem — the  latter  corresponding  best  with  the  exigencies  of 

the  context.     See  Smith's  Bible  Dictionary  on  these  words. 

jEnon  signifies  fountains,  a  place  of  copious  springs.  The  Greek 
Avords  translated  "much  water,"  may  as  fitly  be  translated,  many 
waters  or  fountains,  such  as  would  supply  the  personal  wants  of 
a  large  concourse  of  people. 

24.  For  John  was  not  yet  cast  into  prison. 

The  author  assumes  that  his  readers  know  the  fact  of  John's 
imprisonment.  Therefore  he  simply  refers  to  it  as  not  having 
yet  occurred.     The  Baptist  was  still  prosecuting  his  work. 

25.  Then  there  arose  a  question  between  some  of  John's 
disciples  and  the  Jews  about  purifying. 

26.  And  they  came  unto  John,  and  said  unto  him,  Rabbi, 
he  that  was  w'ith  thee  beyond  Jordan,  to  Avhom  thou  barest 
witness,  behold,  the  same  baptizeth,  and  all  men  come  to 
him. 

All  the  better  textual  authorities  say — not  "  the  Jews,"  but  a 

Jeiv,  in  the  singular. This  "question    about   purifying"  had 

reference  obviously  to  baptism,  that  being  the  only  thing  in  the 
context  to  which  purifying  can  refer.  But  the  precise  shape  of 
the  question  is  not  indicated.  That  the  discussion  resulted  in 
sending  John's  disciples  to  their  master  to  tell  him  what  Jesus 
was  doing  in  the  way  of  baptizing  multitudes  fiivors  the  view 
that  the  dispute  aroseTover  the  mutual  relations  of  the  two  bap- 
tisms— that  of  John  and  that  of  Jesus.  To  John's  disciples  it 
may  have  seemed  that  Jesus  was  working  in  opposition  to  their 
master.  ITad  his  baptism  arty  new  significance,  or  only  the  same 
as  that  of  John  ?  If  both  signified  essentially  a  spiritual  purifi- 
cation, Avhy  should  .both  be  baptizing,  each  building  uji  a  distinct 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  111.  73 

body  of  followers? A  feeling  of  dissatisfaction,  akin  to  envy 

or  jealousy,  seems  to  underlie  the  message  brought  to  John  the 
Baptist  by  his  discijiles. 

27.  John  answered  and  said,  A  man  can  receive  nothing, 
except  it  be  given  him  from  heaven. 

28.  Ye  yourselves  bear  me  Avitness,  that  I  said,  I  am  not 
the  Christ,  but  that  I  am  sent  before  him. 

29.  He  that  hath  the  bride  is  the  bridegroom :  but  the 
friend  of  the  bridegroom,  ■which  standeth  and  heareth  him, 
rcjoiceth  greatly  because  of  the  bridcgi-oom's  voice:  this 
my  joy  therefore  is  fulfilled. 

30.  He  must  increase,  but  I  must  decrease. 

Not  the  least  tinge  of,  envy  is  in  the  words  or  the  heart  of 
John  because  of  the  rising  honor  and  growing  success  of  Jesus. 
He  begins  his  reply  by  saying,  All  spiritual  success  comes  down 
to  men  from  heaven.     Therefore  if  God  gives  moi'e  to  another 

than  to  me,  who  am  I  that  I  should  complain? Besides,  ye 

know  I  never  claimed  to  be  the  Messiah,  but  only  that  I  was  sent 
before  him  to  prepare  his  way.  As  the  bride  belongs  to  the 
bridegroom,  and  not  to  the  bridegroom's  friend,  so  the  church  of 
God — all  real  converts — belong  to  Christ — not  to  me.  i\Iy  high 
mission  is  to  wait  on  the  bridegroom ;  hear  his  words  of  command  ; 
and  promptly,  joyfully  obey  them.  This  my  joy  is  now  complete. 
I  work  for  Jiis  success — not  for  my  own.  It  is  enough  for  me  if 
the  multitudes  throng  around  his  feet.  He  must  increase  in  in- 
fluence and  honor.  1  am  to  be  thrown  more  and  more  into  the 
shade,  and  my  special  followers  must  become,  relatively  to  his, 

fewer  in  number. There  is  moral  grandeur  in  the  hearty  joy 

with  which  John  accepts  this  overshadowing  greatness  of  his 
Mastei*,  eclipsing  his  own  popularity. 

31.  He  that  cometh  from  above  is  al)ove  all:  he  that  is 
of  the  earth  is  earthly,  and  speaketh  of  the  earth  :  he  that 
cometh  from  heaven  is  above  all. 

32.  And  "what  he  hath  seen  and  heard,  that  he  testificth ; 
and  no  man  receiveth  his  testimony. 

Jesus  coming  really  from  above,  from  heaven  itself,  must  surely 
be  above  all  others — higher  in  nature,  in  authority,  in  success. 
As  to  myself,  I  am  only  of  the  earth,  and  my  teaching  is  of  the 
earth,  as  compared  and  contrasted  with  that  of  my  divine  Master. 

The  better  textual  authorities  omit  in  v.  31   the   last  three 

words — "is  above  all" — and  connect  verses  31  and  32  on  this 
Avise  :   "  lie  that  cometh  from  heaven  testifies  what  he  hath  seen 

and  heard." Yet,  strange  to  say,  almost  no  man — none  Avith 

but  few  exceptions — receives  his  testimony. 

33.  He  tliat  hath  received  his  testimony  hath  set  to  his 
seal  that  God  is  true. 


74  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  III. 

There  are  some  noble  exceptions.  lie  who  does  receive  the  tes- 
timony which  accredits  the  Messiah,  puts  his  seal  to  God's  vera- 
city— accepts  the  testimony  of  God  as  veritably  true. 

34.  For  he  "whom  God  hath  sent  speaketh  the  words  of 
God  :  for  God  giveth  not  the  Spirit  by  measure  unto  him. 

The  first  clause  is  virtually  a  moral  truism.  lie  whom  God 
sends  and  accredits  will  speak  his  words,  being  sent  for  no  other 
purpose  save  to  speak  fur  God.  lie  could  not  be  indorsed  b}' 
miracle  if  he  did  not  speak  truly  for  God.  To  him  God  gives  his 
Spirit  in  unmeasured  fullness — the  special  function  and  work  of 
the  Spirit  as  thought  of  here  being  the  same  which  Jesus  con- 
templates in  his  descriptive  epithet — "  The  Spirit  of  truth  "  (John 
14  :  17,  and  15:  26).  Jesus  being  filled  in  the  fullest  measure  by 
this  truth-revealing  Spirit,  would  surely  speak  the  words  of  God. 

35.  The  Father  loveth  the  Son,  and  hath  given  all  things 
into  his  hand. 

Great  truths  are  these,  yet  put  in  words  most  brief  and  ex- 
pressive. The  Father  loveth  the  Son,  especially  for  his  pure, 
self-sacrificing  benevolence ;  fully  approves  of  his  Avork  of  re- 
demption; and  has  committed  to  him  supreme  power  in  heaven 
and  earth  for  its  execution. 

36.  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath  everlasting  life  : 
and  he  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life  ;  but 
the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him. 

Peculiar  solemnity  is  in  these  words,  considered  as  the  last  re- 
corded utterances  of  John  the  Baptist,  whose  life-mission  it  had 
been  to  preach  repentance  to  Israel,  and  exhort  his  countrj'men 
with  mighty  persuasion  to  turn  from  their  sins  that  they  might  be 
ready  to  welcome  their  nation's  Great  Redeemer,  soon  to  appear. 
At  this  point  he  sees  this  Redeemer  already  come — already  preach- 
ing the  gospel  and  ministering  mercy  to  every  penitent,  waiting 
soul.  Can  he  drop  one  last  word  of  earnest,  solemn  testimony 
which  may  avail  to  press  lost  men  forwai'd  to  Jesus  ? — He  has 
said  that  this  Jesus  came  down  from  heaven,  bearing  the  great 
seal  of  God,  speaking  words  from  God,  filled  with  the  Spirit  be- 
yond measure,  loved  of  the  Father,  and  invested  from  Ilim  Avith 
all  power:  and  now,  to  urge  sinners  with  utmost  pressure  of 
motive,  he  proclaims — "  lie  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath  ever- 
lasting life  ' — blessedness  that  never  ends;  while  "he  that  be- 
lieveth not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life,  but  the  wrath  of  God  abi- 
deth on  him."  What  could  he  have  said  more  impressive ;  of 
vaster  import ;  more  appropriate  for  last  Avords  to  be  left  vibra- 
ting in  the  ears  of  his  generation  when  his  own  voice  should  be 

silenced  by  death  ? This  statement,  let  it  be  carefully  noted,  is 

strictly  absolute  and  final ;  it  denies  unqualifiedly  ;  no  form  of 
statement  possible  to  human  speech  can  be  stronger.     It  shuts 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  IV.  75 

off  all  questions  of  limitation — as  e.  g.  whether  "  everListing  "  may 
not  come  to  an  end,  and  another  and  different  sort  of  destiny  fol- 
low. If  the  unbelieving  sinner  shall  not  see  life,  his  die  is  cast 
beyond  hope  of  reversing  it.  The  blessedness  of  life  with  God, 
and  with  all  the  iiure-heartcd  above,  he  can  never  enjoy. 

Nor  let  it  be  said  that  he  has  still  a  refuge  from  the  doom  of 
eternal  woe  in  annihilation,  for  according  to  this  word  of  the 
Lord,  "the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him" — remains  and  dwells 

upon  him  ;  and  there  the  testimony  of  inspiration  leaves  him. 

Shall  it  be  said  that  this  abiding,  ever-enduring  wrath  of  God 
resting  upon  him  docs  not  prevent  his  dropping  into  non-exist- 
ence ?  Why  should  men  ascribe  to  God  the  absurdity  of  making 
his  wrath  abide  forever  upon  nonentities  ?  Do  men  change  the 
eternal  truth  of  God  Avhen  they  pervert  his  words — the  plainest 
and  most  explicit  words  he  can  employ?  Does  it  subserve  any 
good  purpose  for  sinners  to  wrest  God's  words  to  their  own  de- 
struction ? 


CHAPTER   IV. 

Here  is  the  conversation  of  Jesus  with  the  woman  of  Samaria 
which  opened  the  way  for  two  days'  successful  gospel  labor  in  her 
city  and  among  her  people  (vs.  1-42)  ;  then  the  healing  of  a  noble- 
man's son  of  Capernaum  (vs.  43-54). 

1.  When  therefore  tlie  Lord  knew  how  the  Phari.?ees  had 
heard  that  Jesus  made  and  baptized  more  disciples  than 
John, 

2.  (Thoup;h  Jesus  himself  baptized  not,  but  his  disciples,) 

3.  He  left  Judea,  and  departed  again  into  Galilee. 

Jesus  went  from  Judea  into  Galilee  to  place  himself  for  the 
time  beyond  the  persecution  which  his  great  success  in  baptizing 
converts  might  excite.  It  had  come  to  his  knowledge  that  the 
Pharisees  had  heard  that  he  was  making  more  converts  than  even 
the  Baptist  had  made,  and  he  had  reason  to  know  that  this  would 
excite  their  jealousy  and  hate  into  fury.  It  was  his  policy  to 
evade  for  a  time,  and  so  postpone,  the  outburst  of  this  storm  until 
he  had  trained  his  disciples  ;  laid  the  foundations  for  great  gospel 
work  by  his  example  and  his  preaching — in  his  own  phrase,  till 
he  had  "  finished  the  personal  work  the  Father  had  given  him  to 
do."  Here  we  have  the  reasons  why  so  large  a  portion  of  his 
miracles  and  teachings  were  in  Galilee  rather  than  in  Judea. 

The  fact  that  Jesus  himself  did  not  administer  baptism,  but  left 
it  to  his  disciples,  must  be  regarded  as  significant.  This  inci- 
dental mention  of  it  manifests  a  like   purpose,  viz,  to  counter- 


76  GOSPEL  OF   JOHN.— CHAP.  IV. 

vail  an  innate  tendency  in  men  to  overestimate  tlie  value  of  the 
merely  external  and  ritual  things  of  religion.  If  Jesus  had  per- 
formed all  the  baptisms  with  his  own  hand ;  if  the  record  had  re- 
cited minutely  the  attendant  circumstances — the  solemn  forms 
and  ceremonies — the  imposing  display ;  the  impression  upon 
minds  susceptible  to  the  glor^^  of  the  external  vrould  have  been 
magic — and  let  us  also  say,  fearfully  perilous.  To  avoid  this,  Je- 
sus adopted  a  method  -which  bears  its  testimony  through  all  the 
ages  against  overdoing  the  mere  rites  of  religion,  and  against  un- 
due reliance  upon  the  external  matters  of  Christianity.  He 
meant  to  show  for  all  time  that  the  efficacy  of  baptism  lay  not  in 
the  holy,  consecrated  hands  administering  it,  but  in  the  sincerity 
of  the  converts  baptized;  in  "the  answer  of  a  good  conscience 
toward  God  ;  "  and  in  the  power  of  the  cleansing,  sanctifying 
Spirit,  signified  under  this  symbol. 

4.  And  he  must  needs  go  tlirougli  Samaria. 

5.  Then  cometh  he  to  a  city  of  Samaria,  which  is  called 
Sychar,  near  to  the  parcel  of  ground  that  Jacob  gave  to  his 
son  Joseph. 

6.  jSTow  Jacob's  well  was  there.  Jesus  therefore,  being 
Avearied  with  his  journey,  sat  thus  on  the  well :  and  it  was 
about  the  sixth  hour. 

"Svchar"  is  supposed  to  be  the  city  of  Sychem  (otherwise 
Shechem) — this  change  of  name  by  the  Jcavs  being  designed  for 
reproach,  suggesting  either  falsehood  as  involved  in  idol-worship, 
or  from  another  root,  suggesting  drunkenness.  The  city  is  re- 
markable for  its  proximity  to  Jacob's  well,  whose  locality  corre- 
sponds entirely  with  the  sacred  history  of  the  patriarch,  and  is 
indorsed  by  unbroken  tradition  since  the  hour  when  Jesus  sat 
there.  It  has  been  repeatedly  visited  and  examined  in  modern 
times :  was  dug  in  solid  rock,  about  nine  feet  in  diameter  and  one 
hundred  and  five  feet  deep;  was  descended  in  part  by  steps — its 
dej^th  of  water  varying,  as  measured  at  various  times,  from  fifteen 

feet  to  five. We  have  a  probable  reference  to  Jacobs  gift  of  this 

piece  of  ground  to  Joseph  in  his  dying  benediction  (Gen.  48  :  22). 

TheOrientals  are  wont  to  start  their  journeys  with  the  early 

morning.  A  six  hours'  walk  brought  Jesus  there  wearied  and 
worn,  so  that  he  seated  himself  by  the  well  to  rest  and  to  wait  his 
opportunity  for  a  draught  of  water. 

7.  There  cometh  a  woman  of  Samaria  to  draw  water: 
Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Give  me  to  drink. 

8.  (For  his  discij^les  were  gone  away  unto  the  city  to  buy 
meat.) 

9.  Then  saith  the  woman  of  Samaria  unto  him,  How  is  it 
that  thou,  being  a  Jew,  askest  drink  of  me,  which  am  a 
woman  of  Samaria?  for  the  Jews  have  no  dealings  with  the 
Samaritans, 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAR  IV.  77 

Wliilc  the  disciples  were  gone  into  the  city  to  buy  food — an 
hour's  absence — a  woman  of  Samaria  came  up  to  this  well  for 
water — of  course  with  the  necessary  means  for  drawing.  Recog- 
nizing Jesus  as  a  Jew,  she  is  surprised  that  he  should  ask  water 
to  drink  from  a  Samaritan,  and  even  a  Samaritan  woman.  In  all 
Jews  the  caste  feeling  against  Samaritans  was  intense,  and  bj'  the 
laws  of  caste  would  manifest  itself  most  intensely  (though  fool- 
ishly) in  the  point  of  drinking  water  from  their  hands. John 

shows  that  he  is  writing,  not  for  Jewish  readers,  who  would  need 
no  explanation  of  this  woman's  surprise,  but  for  Gentile  readers — 

supposably  of  Asia  Minor. Jesus  had  no  sympathy  Avith  this 

caste  feeling  of  his  countrymen.  We  may  suppose  he  rather 
welcomed  this  opportunity  to  bear  the  testimony  of  his  example 
aud  spirit  squarel}''  and  totally  against  it. 

10.  Je.su.s  aiLswered  and  said  unto  her,  If  thou  knewest 
the  gift  of  God,  and  who  it  is  that  saith  to  thee,  Give  me  to 
drink  ;  thou  wouldcst  have  asked  of  him,  and  he  woukl  have 
given  thee  living  water. 

Skillfully,  tenderly,  impressively,  Jesus  leads  the  mind  of  this 
Samaritan  woman  into  the  great  things  of  gospel  salvation :  "  You 
think  it  strange  that  I  ask  you  for  a  draught  of  water  from  this 
well.  If  you  only  knew  the  great  gift  of  God  to  men,  even  his 
only-begotten  Son  who  is  now  before  j'ou,  you  would  have  asked 

of  him,  and  he  would  have  given  you  living  water." Note  with 

what  inimitable  modesty  and  beauty  Jesus  introduces  himself  as 
the  Giver  of  the  waters  of  life  to  perishing  souls !  Taking  up  the 
ever  fresh  and  precious  Old  Testament  usage  of  the  term  "  waters  " 
— e.  (/.  "Ho  every  one  that  thirsteth,  come  yo  to  the  Avaters  " — he 
identifies  himself  as  the  long  promised  Savior  whose  mission  to 

earth  was  to  "  seek  and  to  save  the  lost." "  Living  water  " — 

not  merely  water  from  a  living  spring  which  never  dries  away, 
l)ut  living  in  a  yet  higher  sense  which  Jesus  himself  Avill  soon 
explain. 

11.  The  woman  saith  unto  him,  Sir,  thou  hast  nothing  to 
draw  with,  and  the  well  is  deep:  from  whence  then  hast  thou 
that  living  water  ? 

12.  Art  thou  greater  tlian  our  father  Jacob,  wdiich  gave 
us  the  well,  and  drank  thereof  himself,  and  his  children,  and 
his  cattle? 

13.  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  her,  Whosoever  drinketh 
of  this  water  shall  thirst  again  : 

14.  But  wdiosoever  drinketh  of  the  w'ater  that  I  shall  give 
him  shall  never  thirst ;  but  the  water  that  I  shall  give  him 
shall  be  in  him  a  well  of  water  sj)ringing  up  into  everlasting 
life. 

Slow  to  measure  the  full  depth  of   the  strange  words,  "living 


78  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  IV. 

water,"  this  -woman  discloses  her  perplexity  : — "  This  Avell  is  deep, 
and  thou  hast  nothing  to  draw  with;  how  then  canst  thou  get 
living  water  from  it?  And  as  for  any  other  Avater  than  this,  Ave 
know  of  none  better.  Art  thou  greater  than  our  father  Jacob  who 
gave  us  this  Avonderful  Avell  the  Avaters  of  which  Avere  good  enough 
for  him  and  his  children?  How  is  this  that  thou  seemest  to  think 
of  better  water  than  this  from  our  father  Jacob  ? These  ques- 
tions bring  up  the  very  point  Avhich  Jesus  wished  to  reach;  his 
explanation  is  therefore  ready  :  You  drink  from  Jacob's  Avell,  and, 
good  though  the  Avater  be,  you  thirst  again.  But  ha\'ing  drank  of 
the  water  that  I  give,  you  never  thirst  again.  It  becomes  within 
you  a  living  fountain,  and  Avells  up  unto  eternal  life.  It  becomes 
a  self-perpetuating  supply.  It  satisfies  once  and  forever.  You 
Avill  ucA'cr  CA'en  desire  any  thing  better.  There  is  life  in  it  for  the 
very  soul.  It  meets  and  fills  the  greatest,  deepest  wants  of  your 
being. This  is  Avhat  Jesus  meant  by  "living  AA'ater;  "  his  pre- 
cious Avords  contain  the  Avhole  of  this  glorious,  priceless  truth ; — but 
the  Avoman  of  Samaria  will  need  more  help  and  more  time  to  grasp 
these  great  thoughts  as  to  the  nature  and  the  fullness  of  Christ's 
sah'ation. 

15.  The  Avoraan  saitli  unto  him,  Sir,  give  me  this  Avatcr, 
that  I  thirst  not,  neither  come  hither  to  clraAV. 

16.  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Go,  call  thy  husband,  and  come 
hither. 

17.  The  Avoman  ansAvercd  and  said,  I  haA^e  no  husband. 
Jesus  said  unto  her.  Thou  hastAveil  said,  I  haA'e  no  husband. 

18.  For  thou  hast  had  fiA'e  husbands  ;  and  he  Avhom  thou 
now  hast  is  not  thy  husband :  in  that  saidst  thou  truly. 

One  thing  she  can  understand :  If  the  water  thus  promised  Avill 
quench  her  thirst  for  all  time  it  must  be  a  real  treasure.  She  has 
had  plenty  of  experience  in  the  toil  of  coming  under  the  sultry 
heats  of  noon  to  lift  water  from  a  hundred  feet  of  depth,  and  she 
can  see  what  a  saving  might  be  made  Avith  Avater  that  would  supply 
itself  and  quench  her  thirst  once  for  all.  So  she  puts  in  her  re- 
quest for  this  ncAV  sort  of  water — of  properties  so  strange. — The 
Master  readily  sees  that  he  must  lead  her  thought  to  deeper  things, 
and  therefore  says,  Go,  call  thy  husband  to  come  with  you. — Her 
quasi-married  life,  she  knew  but  too  Avell,  Avould  not  bear  probing. 
Was  it  because  she  felt  herself  to  be  in  a  Presence  which  aa^ouKI 
pierce  through  all  disguises,  that  she  at  once  brought  out  the  truth, 
"I  have  no  husband,"  or  did  she,  perhaps,  suppose  that  this  state- 
ment would  foreclose  all  further  inquiry  ?  IIoAvever  this  may 
have  been,  Jesus  soon  shoAved  her  that  he  kncAV  her  whole  life- 
history.  How  much  of  crime  may  have  lain  in  that  history,  run- 
ning so  rapidly  through  married  life  Avith  five  husbands,  consecu- 
tive or  otherAvise,  it  Avas  not  important  for  the  moral  purposes  of 
this  story  to  disclose.  The  AA'ords  of  Jesus  sufficed  to  show  that 
he  kncAV  her  AA'hole  life  and  her  A'ery  heart.     This  Avas  one  of  the 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  IV.  79 

impressions  Avhich  the  Master  sought  to  make — one,  but  probably 
not  the  only  one ;  for  we  must  suppose  that  he  meant  also  to 
awaken  conviction  of  sin  and  suggest  that  she  had  ample  occasion 
for  penitence  and  pardon. 

19.  The  woman  saitii  unto  liim,  Sir,  I  perceive  that  thou 
art  a  prophet. 

liO.  Our  lathers  Avorshiped  iii  this  mountain ;  and  ye  say, 
that  in  Jerusalem  is  the  phxcc  where  men  ought  to  worship. 

This  woman  is  frank  to  confess  that  her  life  has  been  truly  told, 
and  that  this  stranger  must  be  a  prophet.  Still  her  thought  docs 
not  readily  turn  toward  her  sinful  life  (as  we  may  suppose  the 
Master  purposed  and  hoped)  ;  but  rather,  as  human  nature  has 
often  done  before  and  since,  drifted  toward  a  theological  contro- 
versy. Assuming  as  before  that  Jesus  is  a  Jew,  she  brings  up  the 
old  and  long  mooted  issue  between  Jews  and  Samaritans  as  to  the 
place  of  acceptable  worship.  Our  fathers,  said  she,  as  you  very 
well   know,  worshiped    in  this  Mt.  Gerizim  :   your   people  insist 

that  men  ought  to  worship  in  Jerusalem. Did  she  propose  to 

get  his  opinion  on  this  question  ;  or  did  she  rather  intend  to  sug- 
gest tacitly  that,  being  a  Jcav,  he  would  doubtless  insist  on  his 
Jewish  doctrine  ;  while  she,  being  a  Samaritan,  must  be  allowed 
to  adhere  to  the  doctrine  of  her  fathers  ? 

21.  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Woman,  believe  me,  the  hour 
Cometh,  when  ye  shall  neither  in  this  mountain,  nor  yet  at 
Jerusalem,  Avorship  the  Father. 

22.  Ye  worship  ye  know  not  what :  we  know  what  we 
worship;  for  salvation  is  of  the  Jews. 

23.  But  the  hour  cometh,  and  now  is,  when  the  true 
worshipers  shall  worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in  truth : 
for  the  Father  seeketh  such  to  worship  him. 

24.  God  is  a  Spirit:  and  they  that  worship  him  must  wor- 
ship him  in  spirit  and  in  truth. 

This  theological  controversy,  then  already  from  four  to  seven 
hundred  years  old,  had  virtually  run  its  course.  So  Jesus,  in- 
stead of  pronouncing  upon  it,  as  she  probably  expected,  pro- 
ceeded at  once  to  supersede  it  by  assuring  her  that  all  such  ques- 
tions as  to  the  locality  of  ritual  worship  were  ruled  out  of  account 
as  no  longer  of  the  least  consequence.  No  matter  whether  men 
sacrifice  on  Gerizim  or  in  Jerusalem,  the  hour  has  come  when 
men  may  worship  ani/ichere  with  equal  acceptance  before  God, 
provided  only  they  worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in  truth.  He 
seeks  such  worship.  The  homage  of  pure  and  loving  hearts  is 
accepted  before  him;  the  place  where  is  no  longer  to  be  regarded. 

Moreover,  ye  Samaritans  have  had  no  sense  of  the  Being  ye 

have  professed  to  worship  ;  ye  have  sacrificed  only  to  an  unknown 
God.     In  this  most  vital  respect,   the   Jews  are  entirely  in  ad- 


80  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  IV. 

vance  of  you,  for  the  light  of  God  abides  -with  them,  and  from 
among  them  the  Savior  of  the  world  is  to  come.  A  new  era  of 
light  and  truth  breaks  forth  upon  the  world ;  old  things  are  pass- 
ing away ;  worship  ceases  to  lie  in  sacrifices  and  ritualities.  God 
makes  himself  known  as  a  Spirit,  and  those  who  would  worship 
him  acceptably  must  give  him  their  heai-t's  homage  in  spirit  and 
in  truth.  Thus  the  old  Judceo-Samaritan  issue  is  swept  away 
and  new  light  breaks  forth. 

25.  The  woman  saith  unto  liirn,  Iknovv'  tliat  Messias  Com- 
eth, which  is  called  Christ:  when  he  is  come,  lie  will  tell  us 
all  things. 

26.  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  I  that  speak  unto  thee  am  lie. 

The  woman  is  borne  onward  by  this  new  announcement.  It 
suggests  to  her  the  ancient  faith  of  her  people — in  some  meas- 
ure common  to  Samaritans  and  to  Jews — "that  Messias  cometh," 
and  that  "when  he  shall  come,  he  will  tell  us  all  things."  The 
Samaritans,  as  is  well  known,  had  a  version  of  the  Pentateuch, 
differing  only  in  few  and  slight  particulars  from  the  ancient  He- 
brew text.  This,  and  this  only,  constituted  their  Old  Testament 
scriptures.  They  have  even  to  this  day  a  copy  of  this  Samaritan 
Pentateuch  which  (wrote  Dr.  Robinson  *  in  183S)  "  they  professed 
was  then   S460   years  old,    referring   it    to    Abishua,  the  son  of 

Phineas"  (1   Chron.  6:   3,  4), In  this   Pentateuch  the  Lord 

had  said  through  Moses  (Dent.  18:  15,  18),  "I  will  raise  them  up 
a  Prophet,  like  unto  thee,  and  I  will  put  my  words  in  his  mouth, 
and  he  shall  speak  unto  them  all  that  I  shall  command  him."  In 
the  simple  thought  this  corresponds  closely  with  the  brief  words 
of  this  Samaritan  woman — "  When  he  is  come,  he  will  tell  us  all 
things;  "  so  that  we  may  safely  assume  that  the  great  Messianic 
promise  on  Avhich  the  Samaritan  faith  rested  was  this  from  Moses 
in  Deuteronomy. — How  must  her  e.ars  have  tingled  when  this 
stranger  at  the  Avell  announced — "I  that  speak  unto  thee  am  he  "  ! 
Indeed;  and  has  our  Great  Messiah,  waited  for  through  long  ages, 
come  at  last !     And  these  eyes  have  seen  him ! 

27.  And  upon  this  came  his  disciples,  and  marveled  that 
he  talked  with  the  woman :  yet  no  man  said,  AYhat  seekest 
thou?  or,  Why  talkest  thou  with  her? 

At  this  crisis  in  the  conversation,  the  disciples  came  up  from 
the  city.  They  are  surprised,  not  to  say  astonished,  to  find  their 
jVIaster  talking  with  a  Samaritan  woman ;  but  either  through  a 
sense  of  his  personal  dignity,  or  a  half  unconscious  conviction  of 
an  unworthy  prejudice  on  their  part,  not  a  man  of  them  dared 
say — What  can  be  thy  object?  or  why  shouldest  thou  talk  with 
her?  "  Wisdom  is  justified  of  her  children."  Goodness  and  truth 
may  sometimes  in  a  sinning  world  like  this  seem  strange,  but  will 

'•■■Piobinsou's  Picsearclies,  Vol.  III.  105. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  IV.  81 

always  be  their  OAvn  vindication  and  command  the  homage  of 
all  honest  minds.  Hence  the  disciples,  though  startled  at  first, 
probably  soon  gave  the  Master  their  more  profound  respect. 

28.  The  woman  then  left  her  waterjiot,  and  Avent  her  way 
mto  the  city,  and  saith  to  the  men, 

29.  Come,  see  a  man,  Avhich  told  me  all  things  that  ever 
I  did :  is  not  this  the  Christ  ? 

30.  Then  they  went  out  of  the  city,  and  came  unto  him. 

Forgetting  the  water  she  came  for,  and  even  dropping  her  water- 
pot,  the  woman  hasted  away  to  the  city  Avith  her  good  ncAvs.  She 
hails  the  men  from  afar:  "Come,  see  a  man  who  has  told  me  all 
things  that  ever  I  did:  Is  not  this  the  Christ?"  Did  she  tell 
them  also  how  he  said  explicitly — "I  that  speak  unto  thee  am 
he"?  Very  probably;  but  wisely  she  puts  the  argument  before 
the  assertion.  She  verily  knew  that  this  stranger  had  revealed 
to  her  the  great — shall  v\'e  say  the  guilt}/ — secret  of  her  life.  He 
had  shown  her  that  he  knew  it  all.  She  was  therefore  sure  he 
must  be  far  more  than  human.  Moreover,  must  we  not  attribute 
her  faith  in  him  as  the  Messiah  in  no  small  part  to  the  moral 
evidence  that  shone  forth  in  his  benignity,  his  manifest  goodness 
of  heart;  his  gentleness,  and  tenderness,  and  compassion;  his 
marvelous  interest  in  her  welfare — so  strange  in  the  experience 
of  a  lone  Avoman,  from  a  despised  race,  engaged  in  a  menial  service, 
with  not  a  thing  to  recommend  her,  save  degradation,  and  want, 
and  a  poor  human  soul! Her  story,  so  earnestly  told,  so  start- 
ling in  its  facts,  seems  to  move  the  Avhole  city.  They  follow  her 
back  to  the  scene  and  to  the  "  Man." 

31.  In  the  meanwhile  his  disciples  prayed  him,  saying, 
Master,  eat. 

32.  But  lie  said  unto  them,  I  have  meat  to  eat  that  ye 
know  not  of. 

33.  Therefore  said  the  disciples  one  to  another,  Hath  any 
man  brought  him  aurjld  to  eat? 

34.  Jesus  saith  unto  them.  My  meat  is  to  do  the  Avill  of 
him  that  sent  me,  and  to  finish  his  work. 

The  disciples  foiled  to  appreciate  how  intently  absorbed  their 
Master  had  become  in  his  labors  for  this  woman  and  her  people; 
or,  we  may  perhaps  suppose,  thought  that  hunger  and  fatigue  had 
demands  which  even  this  great  spiritual  crisis  should  not  over- 
rule. Accordingly,  during  the  absence  of  the  woman,  they  pressed 
him  to  eat.  He  replied,  "  I  have  meat  to  eat  that  ye  know  not 
of"  Observe,  they  do  not  ask  him  to  explain;  do  not  say — "We 
do  not  understand  what  thou  canst  mean;  "  but  they  said  in  an 
under-tone  one  to  another — Hath  any  man  brought  him  food? 
Does  any  one  know  how  or  whence  he  has  obtained  bread  ? — 
Apparently  there  Avcre  limits  to  the  fumiliarity  which  they  felt  to 


82  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  IV. 

be  admissible  Avith  their  Master.  There  was  more  depth  to  his 
character  than  they  had  yet  fathomed ;  a  modest  reserve  on  their 

part  was  therefore  becoming. In  this  case,  as  usual,  Jesus  knew 

their  thought,  and  so  proceeds  to  explain:   "My  meat  is  to  do  the  ' 
will  of  him  that  sent  me,  and  to  finish  his  work."     This  is  more 
to  me  than  bread.     In  the  crisis  of  a  great  harvest  hour,  men  will 
forget  the  body  through  the  unutterable  yearnings  and  longings 
of  the  soul. 

35.  Say  not  ye,  There  are  yet  four  months,  and  then  com- 
eth  harvest?  behold,  I  say  unto  you.  Lift  up  your  eyes,  and 
look  on  the  fields;  for  they  are  white  already  to  harvest. 

36.  And  he  that  reapeth  receiveth  wages,  and  gathereth 
fruit  unto  life  eternal:  that  both  he  that  soweth  and  he  that 
reapeth  may  rejoice  together. 

37.  And  herein  is  that  saying  true.  One  sov^'eth  and  an- 
other reapeth. 

38.  I  sent  you  to  reap  that  whereon  ye  bestowed  no 
labor :  other  men  labored,  and  ye  are  entered  into  their 
labors. 

There  are  tAvo  slightly  variant  interpretations  of  the  Avords — 
"Say  ye  not.  There  are  yet  four  months  and  then  cometh  har- 
A'cst?" — one  assuming  the  words  to  be  a  proverbial  expression, 
naturally  on  the  lij^s  of  the  sower  as  he  looks  onAvard  from 
seeding  to  harvest;  the  other  assuming  that  the  disciples  had 
been  saying  these  words  just  then  as  they  looked  forth  upon 
grain  fields  then  green  and  full  of  promise.  In  either  case  it  is 
held  that  Jesus  made  these  Avords  the  text  of  his  remarks  on- 
Avard  to  the  end  of  v.  38. 

The  supposition  of  a  proA'erb  lacks  support  from  known  usage ; 
and  encounters  graA^e  diiSculties  from  the  fact  that  in  Palestine 
the  usual  interval  from  the  seed-time  for  gi-ain  to  harvest  is  from 

five  to  six  mouths,  and  not  merely  four. Adopting  therefore 

the  latter  construction  of  these  pivotal  Avords,  Ave  may  paraphrase 
the  passage  on  this  Avise:  Were  ye  not  just  noAV  saying  as  ye 
looked  doAvn  these  fertile  A'alleys — Four  months  more  and  these 
fields  noAV  green  will  be  waA'ing  Avith  their  yellow  harvests?  Be- 
hold, I  say  unto  you,  look  down  these  valleys  again ;  mark  those 
thronging  groups  of  men  from  the  city,  led  on  by  the  AA'oman  ye 
saAv  here  at  the  well.  Are  ye  aAvare  hoAv  deeply  their  hearts  are 
moved,  hoAV  anxiously  they  are  inquiring  Avhether  the  Savior  of  the 
Avorld  has  really  come,  and  hoAV  ripe  they  are  for  a  spiritual  har- 
vest ?  NoAV  is  the  time  for  reaping  and  for  the  wages  of  fruit 
unto  life  eternal.  Here  j^ou  are  spared  the  toil  of  soAving  and 
the  trial  of  waiting  long  months  for  the  harvest  hour.  Should 
not  such  a  harvest  time  as  this  charm  even  hungry  men  away 
from  their  bread  ? 

3^).  And  many  of  the  Samaritans  of  that  city  believed  on 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  IV.  83 

liira  for  the  saying  of  tlie  woman,  wluch  testified,  lie  told 
me  all  that  ever  I  did. 

40.  So  when  the  Samaritans  were  come  unto  him,  tliey 
besought  him  that  he  would  tarry  with  them:  and  he  abode 
there  two  days. 

41.  And  many  more  believed  because  of  his  own  word  ; 

42.  And  said  unto  the  woman,  Now  we  believe,  not  be- 
cause of  thy  saying :  for  wo  have  heard  him  ourselves,  and 
know  that  this  is  indeed  the  Christ,  the  Savior  of  the 
world. 

The  rcmahidcr  of  this  narrative  is  put  only  in  general  state- 
ment. Many  of  tlie  Samaritans  from  the  city  believed,  on  the 
basis  of  the  woman's  personal  testimony.  AVlien  they  saw  Jesus 
fur  themselves  they  begged  him  to  come  and  stay  with  them.  He 
went  and  abode  there  two  days.  In  the  result  many  more  be- 
lieved and  said  to  this  woman — We  believe,  not  on  the  ground 
of  your  words,  but  of  what  we  have  seen  and  heard  for  ourselves. 
Now  we  know  that  this  is  indeed  the  Christ,  the  Savior  of  the 
world. 

It  is  noticeable  that  no  people  in  either  Galilee  or  Judea  seem 
to  have  embraced  the  gospel  from  the  Savior's  lips  with  equal 
readiness.     Pul)licans  and  harlots  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven 

before  proud  Pharisees. When,  after  the  first  persecution  had 

driven  the  disciples  out  of  Jerusalem,  "  Philip  went  down  to  Sa- 
maria and  preached  Christ  unto  them"  (Acts  8:  5-8),  "the  people 
with  one  accord  gave  heed ;"  "and  there  was  great  joy  in  that  city." 
Tlien  the  seed  sown  here  by  Jesus  himself  brought  forth  yet  an- 
other glorious  harvest. 

lleviewing  this  story  to  gather  up  its  marvelous  points  as  they 
bear  upon  the  labors  and  the  life  of  the  Great  Master  of  Israel, 
let  us  note  that  these  labors  began,  not  with  a  vast  congregation, 
but  witli  a  single  individual;  not  upon  a  set  appointment,  but  in 
a  merely  incidental,  casual  meeting;  not  when  the  ]\Iaster  Avas 
fresh  and  buoyant,  but  Avhen  Aveary  and  hungry  with  a  six  hours' 
walk;  and  note  also  that  this  one  Avas  not  some  distinguished 
gentleman,  but  an  unknoAvn  woman,  to  be  thought  of  as  women 
are  wont  to  be  in  Oriental  society;  not  of  high  caste,  but  of  low; 
not  moving  in  the  higher  plane  of  social  life,  but  apparently  in 
tlie  lowest;  not  a  Avoman  of  previously  unblemished  reputation, 
l)ut  one  Avhose  record  AA'as  at  least  doubtful,  not  to  say  sus- 
picious. In  short,  the  only  point  of  attractiveness  apparent  to  us 
in  her  case  AA^as  that  she  Avas  human — a  soul  to  be  saved  or  lost. 
To  her  Jesus  addressed  himself  as  Ave  have  seen,  assiduously,  dis- 
creetly, tenderly;  he  AA'on  her  confidence  by  his  benignity,  kind- 
ness, and  manifested  interest  in  ber  true  Avelfare,  and  pressed 
steadily  toAvard  the  end  he  had  in  vicAV,  refusing  to  be  diverted 

from  it  for  even  one  moment  to  any  side  issue. We   admire 

liis  skill  of  approach  ;  Ave  love  his  spirit  of  inimital)le  goodness 


84  GOSPEL  OF  JOPIN.— CHAr.  IV. 

and  condescension.  Let  us  never  forget  that  he  has  left  us  an  ex- 
ample that  we  should  walk  in  his  stops.  In  our  humble  measure 
■\ve  may  follow  where  he  has  so  beautifully  led  the  way,  and  if  we 
can  not  do  things  as  gi-eat,  we  may  at  least  aspire  through  his 
grace  to  be  equally  loving,  kind,  and  good. 

43.  Now  after  two  days  lie  departed  thence,  and  Avent  into 
Galilee. 

44.  For  Jesus  himself  testified,  that  a  prophet  hath  no 
honor  in  his  own  country. 

45.  Then  when  he  was  come  into  Galilee,  the  Galileans 
received  him,  having  seen  all  the  things  that  he  did  at  Jeru- 
salem at  the  feast :  for  they  also  went  unto  the  feast. 

The  reasoning  suggested  by  "for"  (Gr.  yap)  in  v.  44,  has 
greatl}^  perplexed  critics.  Assuming  his  own  country  to  be  Gali- 
lee, and  that  a  man  should  naturally  go  where  he  could  expect 
to  receive  the  honor  due  him,  they  have  said.  How  happens  it 
that  the  reason  assigned  for  his  going  into  Galilee  is  that  according 
to  his  own  knowledge  and  frequent  testimony,  he  could  have  no 

suitable  honor  there? 1  have  to  suggest  that  some  relief  in 

this  dilemma  may  come  from  the  two  following  considerations: — 
(ffl.)  That,  comparing  Samaria  with  Galilee,  the  former  honored 
him  as  a  prophet;  the  latter,  only  as  a  worker  of  miracles  (v.  48). 
In  Samaria,  Jesus  wrought  no  miracles,  yet  the  people  honored 
him  as  a  great  prophet.     No  such  honor  was  accorded  to  him  in 

his  own  country — Galilee. (b.)  It  is  supposable  that  Jesus  had 

reasons  for  choosing  to  go  for  the  time  where  he  would  have  less 
honor  rather  than  where  he  might  have  the  greatest.  Recurring 
to  the  points  adduced  in  4:  1-3,  we  see  that  he  left  Judea  and 
Avent  into  Galilee  because  he  was  making  disciples  dangerously 
fast;  because  his  popularity  there  might  expose  him  too  soon  to 
the  murderous  rage  of  his  enemies.  For  a  similar  reason  it 
might  be  his  choice  to  leave  Samaria  and  go  into  Galilee,  for  no 
such  reception  awaited  him  in  his  own  country  as  might  prema- 
turely excite  the  jealousy  and  wrath  of  the  Pharisees  and  hasten 
their  persecution  to  its  deadly  crisis. 

Th^  Galileans  received  him  because  they  had  seen  his  miracles 

in  Jerusalem  at  the  feast.     (See  2:  23.) The  remark,  "For  they 

also  went  xinto  the  feast,"  suggests  again  that  the  writer  exjilains 
points  which  no  Jewish  reader  would  need  to  have  explained,  but 
of  which  remote  Gentiles,  e.  g.  those  of  Asia  Minor,  would  need 
explanation. 

46.  So  Jesus  came  again  into  Cana  of  Galilee,  where  he 
made  the  Avater  wine.  And  there  was  a  certain  nobleman, 
whose  son  was  sick  at  Capernaum. 

47.  "When  he  heard  that  Jesus  Avas  come  out  of  Judea 
into  Galilee,  he  Avent  unto  him,  and  besought  him  that  he 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  IV.  85 

would  come  down,  and   heal   his  son :  for   he   Avas  at  the 
point  of  death. 

48.  Then  said  Jesus  unto  him,  Except  yc  see  signs  and 
wonders,  ye  will  not  believe. 

49.  The  nobleman  saith  unto  him,  Sir,  come  down  ere 
my  child  die. 

50.  Jesus  saith  imto  him,  Go  thy  way ;  thy  son  liveth. 
And  the  man  believed  the  word  that  Jesus  had  spoken  un- 
to him,  and  he  went  his  way. 

51.  And  as  he  was  now  going  down,  his  servants  met 
him,  and  told  km,  saying,  Thy  son  liveth. 

52.  Then  inquired  he  of  them  the  hour  when  he  began 
to  amend.  And  they  said  unto  him.  Yesterday  at  the 
seventh  hour  the  fever  left  him. 

53.  So  the  father  knew  that  it  was  at  the  same  hour,  in 
the  Avhich  Jesus  said  unto  him,  Thy  son  liveth:  and  him- 
self believed  and  his  whole  house. 

54.  This  is  again  the  second  miracle  that  Jesus  did,  when 
he  Avas  come  out  of  Judea  into  Galilea. 

A  "nobleman,"  of  princely  rank,  but  bej'Ond  this  fact,  indi- 
cated by  the  Greek  term,*  nothing  is  known  of  him.  His  son 
lay  at  the  point  of  death  in  Capernaum.  The  father  met  Jesus 
in  Cana  and  besought  him  to  come  do\vn  and  heal  his  son.  This 
request  brought  to  the  mind  of  Jesus  the  moral  dullness  of  the 
Galilean  people,  -which  could  be  moved  to  faith  by  nothing  short 
of  miracle.  Whether  Jesus  intended  this  remark  to  bear  directly 
upon  this  nobleman  does  not  appear.  It  at  least  fell  short  of  a 
prompt  consent  to  go.  But  the  nobleman  was  thoroughly  in 
earnest  and  would  not  be  put  aside.  His  urgency  evinced  his 
faith  in  both  the  power  and  the  love  of  Jesus — a  case  which  Je- 
sus could  not  refuse  to  meet.  Hence  the  reply  was  decisive  :  "  Go 
thy  way,  thy  son  liveth."  The  man  believed  this  word,  and 
moved  on  homeward  joyfully.  It  Mas  the  next  day  that  his  serv- 
ant met  him  to  say  that  his  son  was  doing  well.  He  inquired 
from  what  hour,  and  found  it  to  be  the  moment  when  Jesus»gave 
him  that  word  of  promise  and  life.  On  the  joyful  testimony  of 
this  miracle,  himself  and  all  his  house  believed. 

We  may  note  the  striking  variety  in  the  manner'  in  which  Je- 
sus performed  miracles.  Sometimes  he  wrought,  as  here,  at  a  dis- 
tance, but  usually  in  his  presence  ;  sometimes  he  imposed  hands  ; 
sometimes  imparted  the  gift  through  the  touch  of  his  garments; 
sometimes  in  silence,  and  at  other  times  after  crying  aloud  as  in 
one  case,  "  Lazarus,  come  forth."  Eestricted  to  no  set  forms,  ap- 
parently adopting  the  widest  range  of  variety  for  the  very  pur- 
pose of  heightening  the  evidence  of  real  miracle,  yet  always  care- 


8G  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  V. 

ful  to  shape  these  great  works  so  as  to  inspire  faith  in  his  divine 
person,  and  to  reveal  the  deep  love  and  compassion  of  his  heart, 
his  miracles  reach  the  perfection  of  testimony  (in  this  line)  to 
his  Messiahship,  and  evermore  couple  with  this  testimony  the 
most  precious  iUustrations  of  liis  spiritual  power  for  the  saving 
of  human  souls  from  death  in  sin  to  life  in  (lod.  We  look  with 
admiration  upon  the  wise  economy  of  spiritual  forces  and  the 
wealth  of  great  truth  illustrated  which  was  secured  ])j  the  mir- 
acles of  the  Won  of  God. 


CHAP  TEH   V. 

The  wonderful  words  of  Jesus  recorded  in  this  chapter  were 
occasioned  l)y  the  miracle  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda,  and  the  cap- 
tious hostility  of  the  Jews  because  Jesus  bade  the  restored  crip- 
ple take  up  his  bed  and  walk  upon  the  Sabbath. 

The  facts  of  the  case  stand  in  verses  1-16;  the  reply  of  Jesus, 
remarkable  for  its  unbroken  continuity,  for  its  pungency,  its 
moral  force,  its  boldness,  and  its  astounding  revelations,  fills  out 
vs.  17-47. 

1.  After  this  there  was  a  feast  of  the  Jews;  aud  Jesus 
went  up  to  Jerusalem. 

The  discussion  of  the  question.  What  feast?  has  been  vigorous 
and  long  protracted,  without  as  yet  reaching  any  general  agree- 
ment among  critics.  Special  importance  attaches  to  this  question 
because  of  its  bearing  upon  the  duration  of  Christ's  public  min- 
istry. The  data  for  this  question  are  in  this  gospel  of  John — and, 
more  specifically,  in  the  notices  he  gives  us  of  the  several  Pass- 
overs that  occurred  between  his  baptism  and  his  death.  Of  these, 
three  are  fully  defined,  viz.  (1)  John  2:  13,  23,  supposed  to  have 
been  about  six  months  after  his  baptism;  (2)  John  6:4;  (3)  John 
12:  1,  and  13  :  1,  at  which  last  his  ministry  closed  with  his  death. 
If  now  this  doubtful  reference  (John  5 :  1)  be  a  fourth,  we  have  a 
ministry  of  three  and  a  half  years  ;  but  if  this  be  some  other  than 
a  Passover  feast,  his  ministry  is  apparently  reduced  to  two  years 
and  a  half.     Hence  the  special  importance  of  this  question. 

The  discussion  has  narrowed  the  question  mainly  to  the  one 
issue  between  the  feast  of  Purim  in  the  month  Adar — the  last  of 
the  Jewish  year,  and  the  Passover,  which  would  be  in  the  first 
month. 

One  point  of  some  importance  is  the  omission  or  insertion  of 
the  Greek  article.  Did  John  write — "a  feast,"  or  "  the  feast"  ? 
Unfortunately  this  point  is  in  dispute  with  the  testimony  for  and 
against  the  article  nearly  balanced — perhaps  slightly  preponder- 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  V.  87 

iiting  against.  The  Sinaifcic,  however,  gives  the  article,  and  Tis- 
cheudorf  admits  it,  but  Alford,  Meyor,  and   Thohick  reject  it. 

The  article,  admitted,  would  favor  the  theory  of  the  Passover. 

It  makes  against  Purim  that  it  did  not  convene  the  Jcavs  en  masse 
at  Jerusalem.  They  rather  kept  it  in  their  several  villages  over 
the  whole  country.  But  hero  arc  the  multitudes  together  (v.  13). 
Also  that  this  was  not  a  specially  religious  festival,  but  rather  one 
of  hilarity  and  feasting  in  commemoration  of  victory  over  Ilaman 
and  his  party  in  the  days  of  Estiier.  It  is  asked  with  no  little 
force — Would  Jesus  be  likely  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem  to  attend  this 

feast  there? Yet  again:  This  feast  is  not  described  as  being 

that  of  Purim.  But  John  is  wont  to  describe  those  feasts  that 
might  need  description,  e.  g.  the  feast  of  tabernacles  (7:2);  and 
the  feast  of  dedication,  dating  from  the  times  of  Antiochus  (John 
10:  22).     A  feast  of  the  Jews  with  no  descriptive  epithet  or  name 

is  most  likely  to  bo  the  one  best  known  of  all — the  Passover. 

It  is  thought  to  make  somewhat  against  the  Passover  that  in  other 
references  to  this  feast,  John  names  it  definitely.  Why,  it  is 
asked,  should  he  not  in  this  case  ?  The  proper  reply  is  that  this 
argument  bears  with  yet  greater  force  against  any  and  every  other 
feast  of  the  Jews,  and  therefore  throws  its  weight  in  favor  of  the 
Passover. 

It  is  also  urged  very  earnestly  that  assuming  this  to  be  the  Pass- 
over, there  is  too  much  unoccupied  time  between  this  one  and 
that  of  John  6  :  4.  But  who  can  tell  how  many  of  Christ's  deeds 
and  words  may  be  unrecorded?  No  one  of  the  four  histories 
claims  to  be  exhaustive. In  my  view,  the  strongest  circum- 
stance in  favor  of  the  shorter  ministry  (22  years),  is  the  virulence 
of  his  enemies.  Is  it  probable  that  they  were  frustrated  and  kept 
in  check  through  three  and  half  years? 

This  synopsis  of  the  arguments,  ^jro  and  con,  is  by  no  means 
exhaustive.  I  incline  to  the  Passover  theory,  but  recognize  the 
difficulties  and  uncertainties  of  the  problem,  and  honor  the  great 
names  arrayed  on  the  other  side.  I  doubt  if  the  question  can 
ever  be  determined  with  entire  certainty. 

2.  Now  there  is  at  Jerusalem  hy  the  sheep  marled  a  pool, 
which  is  called  in  the  Hebrew  tongue  Bethesda,  having  five 
porches. 

3.  In  these  lay  a  great  multitude  of  impotent  folk,  of 
blind,  halt,  withered,  Avaiting  for  the  moving  of  the  water. 

4.  For  an  angel  went  down  at  a  certain  season  into  the 
pool,  and  troubled  the  water :  whosoever  then  first  after  the 
troubling  of  the  Avater  stepped  in  was  made  whole  of  what- 
soever disease  he  had. 

In  this  passage  the  best  textual  authorities  omit  from  v.  3,  the 
words — "waiting  for  the  moving  of  the  water,"  and  also  v.  4  en- 
tire.    The  three  most  ancient  manuscripts  (the  Sinaitic,  Vatican, 


88  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— Cll.Vr.  V. 

and  Alexandrian)  omit  the  last  clanse  of  v.  3 ;  the  Sinaitic  and 
Vatican  omit  v.  4  altogether,  while  the  Alexandrian  has  instead 
of  it — "  An  anp;el  of  the  Lord  washed  at  a  certain  season." 
Hence  the  best  modern  critics  disallow  the  original  anthority  of 
these  passages.  They  suppose  that  the  waters  of  this  pool  were 
medicinal  and  intermittent — both  these  facts  depending  upon  nat- 
ural and  not  supernatural  causes;  but  that  this  healing  virtue  as 
well  as  the  intermittent  flow  came  to  be  associated  in  the  popular 
mind  with  angelic  agency,  and  that  this  tradition  M'as  ultimately 

embodied  in  the  text  as  in  our  received  version. It  is  suppos- 

able  that  the  first  flow  after  an  intermission  would  be  more  highly 
charged  with  medicinal  gases,  and  hence  the  popular  belief  might 
have  had  some  basis  of  fact — viz,  that  the  first  man  to  bathe  in 
the  pool  when  the  water  came  freshly  in  would  be  healed. 

This  pool  obtained  the  name  "Bethesda" — House  of  mercy — 
from  the  circumstance  that  so  many  poor  objects  of  compassion 
found  relief  in  its  waters.  Consequently,  tliere  lay  around  it  a 
great  multitude  suffering  under  various  ills,  biding  their  time  for 
the  hour  of  healing. 

5.  And  a  certain  man  was  tliere,  which  had  an  infirmity 
thirty  and  eight  years. 

6.  AVhen  Jesus  saw  him  lie,  and  knew  that  he  had  been 
now  a  long  tinie  in  that  case,  he  saith  unto  him,  ^Vilt  thou 
be  made  whole  ? 

7.  The  impotent  man  answered  him.  Sir,  I  have  no  man, 
when  the  water  is  troubled,  to  put  me  into  the  pool :  but 
while  I  am  commg,  another  steppeth  down  before  me. 

Among  them  was  one,  a  paralytic,  almost  powerless,  who  had 
been  under  this  infirmity  thirtj'-eight  years.  Was  there  still  a 
flickering  hope  in  his  stricken  heart  ?  lie  might  as  well  be  there 
as  anywhere,  dim  as  the  last  ray  of  hope  in  his  soiil  seems  to  have 
been.  Jesus  knew  he  had  been  long  in  this  sad  case.  Is  it  strange 
that  his  compassions  were  moved,  and  that,  unasked,  he  came  for- 
Avard  to  accost  him — "  Dost  thou  wish — art  thou  willing — to  be 

made  whole?" Observe  here  that  in  the  words  used  by  Jesus, 

"  wilt"  is  not  the  English  future  tense,  but  is  a  verb  of  Avilling, 
of  purpose  inspired  by  real  desire.  Art  thou  waiting  and  long- 
ing for  the  soundness  and  strength  of  a  whole  man? He  re- 
plies— I  am  here,  friendless  and  alone,  Avith  none  to  help  me  into 
this  pool  at  the  favored  moment;  while  I  am  crawling  slowly  for- 
ward, another,  less    crippled  than  I,  steps  in  before  me,  and  I 

miss  it  every  time. This  was  his  answer  to  the  point  of  being 

willing  to  be  healed : — "  Indeed  I  am  ;  I  have  done  my  best  never 
so  long — sick  at  heart  over  my  perpetual  disappointment." 

8.  Jesus  saith  unto  him,  Rise,  take  up  thy  bed,  and  walk. 

9.  And  immediately  the  man  was  made  whole,  and  took 
up  his  bed,  and  walked  :  and  on  the  same  day  was  the  sabbath. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  V.  89 

With  the  words,  "Rise,  take  up  thy  bed  and  walk" — anew 
power  courses  through  his  long  crippled  frame  ;  a  new  energy  comes 
to  his  will ;  and  ere  he  has  time  for  a  second  thought,  he  springs 
to  his  feet,  seizes  his  pallet  and  begins  to  walk — a  new  man  !  Ali, 
indeed;  this  is  the  power  of  Jesus;  thus  it  became  manifest  that 
"in  him  is  life."  So  the  new  life  toward  God  of  souls  new-born 
through  faith  in  Jesus  found  a  rich  and  truly  wonderful  illustra- 
tion. 

It  happened  that  the  day  of  this  healing  was  the  Sabbath.  On 
this  fact  hinged  tlie  furious,  bigoted  assault  made  upon  Jesus  by 
the  Jews. 

10.  The  Jews  therefore  said  unto  lilin  that  was  cured,  It 
is  the  sabbath  day :  it  is  not  hiwful  for  thee  to  carry  tlii/ 
bed. 

11.  He  answered  them,  He  that  made  me  whole,  the  same 
said  unto  me.  Take  up  thy  bed,  and  w'alk. 

12.  Then  asked  they  him,  What  man  is  that  which  said 
unto  thee.  Take  up  thy  bed,  and  walk  ? 

13.  And  he  that  was  healed  wist  not  w'ho  it  was :  for  Je- 
sus had  conveyed  himself  away,  a  nmltitude  being  in  that 
place. 

The  words,  "The  Jews,"  as  used  by  John  in  such  a  connection 
denote  the  adherents  of  the  Sanhedrim— the  party,  mostly  Phari- 
sees, who  were  by  position  the  spiritual  leaders  of  the  Jewish 
people.     There  was  a  class  of  "common  people,"  quite  distinct 

from   these  "Jews  "  (so   called)   who  "  heard  Jesus  gladly." 

"  They  said  to  him  that  was  cured  " — for  they  knew  him  as  such— 
knew  that  he  had  been,  through  an  average  life-time,  a  miserable, 
helpless  cripple,  till  now,  all  suddenly,  he  is  before  them  a  healed 
and  sound  man.  Do  they  rejoice  with  him  in  sympathy  and  love  ? 
Do  they  invite  him  into  their  temple  to  render  his  thank-offering 
fo  God  there  ?  Do  they  ask — A¥ho  is  he  that  spake  thy  palsied 
])ody  into  this  new  and  wonderful  life  ? — Not  a  word  of  all  this. 
No;  but  they  assail   him  rudely   for  carrying  his   cot — perhaps 

every  thing  he  can  call  his  own  on  earth — on  the  Sabbath. 

He  answers  according  to  the  simple  truth:  "  The  man  who  made 
me  whole  bade  me  take  up  my  bed  and  walk."  They  ask  him  who 
it  was,  not  that  cured  him^for  that  seems  in  their  eye  a  matter 
quite  indifferent — but  who  it  was  that  ordered  him  to  carry  his 

bed  on  the  Sabbath. At  first  the  man  could  not  tell;  it  was  a 

stranger,  and  he  suddenly  disappeared,  to  escape  the  notice  of 

the  multitude. We  fear  this  healed  man  did  not  fix  a  grateful, 

tearful  eye  upon  his  benefiictor — did  not  rush  to  his  feet  to  pour 
out  his  thanksgivings  there  for  the  first  great  mercy  of  his  life. 
Certainly  his  record  is  less  fair  on  this  point  than  we  could 
wish. 

14.  Afterward  Jesus  fiadeth  him  ia  the  temple,  and  said 


90  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAr.  V. 

unto  hiin,  Behold,  thou  art  made  -whole :  sin  no  more,  lest 
a  Avorse  thing  come  unto  thee. 

15.  The  man  departed,  and  told  the  Jews  that  it  was  Je- 
sus, Avhich  had  made  him  Avholc. 

Afterward  Jesus  met  him  "  in  the  temple."  We  may  hope  he 
was   there    for    a    grateful    purpose.      It   was   the   fit  place   for 

him. The  words  of  Jesus — "  8in  no  more,  lest  a  worse  thing 

come  unto  thee  " — seem  to  imply  that  sin  had  brought  on  him 
that  fearful  malady  of  his  life ;  and  that  more  sin  of  similar  sort 
would  bring  on  a  relapse  into  a  state  more  dreadful  still.  There 
are  abuses  of  the  human  body — sins,  they  deserve  to  be  called — 
which  entail  swift  and  appalling  retribution.  Let  men  mark 
them  and  take  warning!  It  is  at  least  supposable  that  Jesus  saw 
in  this  healed  man  but  too  much  proclivity  still  toward  his  old 
paths  of  self-destruction. 

This  man  has  now  learned  that  his  benefactor  is  Jesus,  and 

seems  to  have  lost  no  time  in  reporting  the  fact  to  the  Jews. 

Was  he  under  moral  obligation  to  report  this?  Was  it  kind  in 
him  toward  his  best  earthly  Friend  ?     Did  he  not  know  that  they 

sought  this  information  for  a  malicious  purpose? We  hear  of 

this  healed  man  no  more,  and  are  left  to  infer  that  there  was  verj"- 
little  of  moral  stamina,  or  of  wholesome,  lovable  character,  or  of 
real  gratitude,  in  him.  So  many  weary  years  of  sinning  and  of 
suffering  may  have  given  him  but  the  least  possible  moral  culture, 
bringing  out  almost  nothing  worthy  of  love  or  esteem,  so  that  Jesus 
may  have  been  moved  to  heal  him  solely  through  pity  for  a  great 
sinner  and  sufferer.  We  will  not  overlook  tlie  fact  that  on  this 
supposition  of  the  case,  the  character  of  Jesus  shines  out  with 
peculiar  brilliancy  and  beauty. 

16.  And  therefore  did  the  Jews  persecute  Jesus,  and 
sought  to  slay  him,  because  he  had  done  these  things  on  the 
Sabbath  day. 

Now  the  Jews  have  a  case  of  crime  against  Jesus.  They  have 
testimony  which  in  their  view  will  convict  him  of  violating  the 
Sabbath.  For  the  laws  of  i\Ioses  forbade  the  bearing  of  burdens 
on  the  sacred  day  (Jer.  17  :  21,  22,  27,  and  Neh.  13  :  15) ;  and  Jesus 
had  bidden  a  man  rise  and  carry  his  bed  on  the  Sabbath.  They 
are  now  readj^  for  measures  against  his  life. 

Such  unreasoning,  virulent  hatred  seems  in  every  aspect 
astounding.  Did  they  see  no  love  and  kindness  in  this  healing 
of  a  miserable  paralytic,  thirty-eight  years  before  their  ej^es  a 
helpless  sufferer?  Did  they  see  noj^oirerin  it  which  should  have 
awed  them  into  reverence,  and  forced  them  to  ask — What  manner 
of  man  is  this  who  bids  a  life-long  paralytic  "  rise  and  walk ;  "  and 
he  rises  in  their  sight,  a  whole  man  ?     How  can  we  account  for  it 

that  fiicts  like  these  fell  powerless  upon  their  hardened  souls  ? 

It  is  very  much  easier  to  adjust  this  case  to  the  well  known  laws 
of  depraved  human  nature  than  to  justify  it  to  reason.     To  these 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  V.  91 

Jews,  their  religion  Avas  bread  and  honor — all  their  living.  But, 
the  soul  of  their  religion  being  practically  extinct,  its  body — the 
mei'ely  external  form — required  the  more  careful  adornment. 
When  religion  has  nothing  but  an  outside,  the  utmost  possible 
must  be  made  of  this.  Hence  their  rigid,  extreme  construction 
of  the  law  of  the  Sabbath.  Farrar  (Life  of  Christ,  p.  175)  speaks 
of  "  the  wretched  formalistic  inferences  of  their  forged  traditions 
as  having  gravely  decided  that  on  the  Sabbath  a  nailed  shoe  might 
not  be  worn  because  it  was  a  burden,  but  an  unnailed  shoe  might 
be  worn ;  that  a  person  might  go  out  with  two  shoes  on,  but  not 
with  one  only  ;  that  one  man  might  carry  a  loaf  of  bread  but  that 
two  men  might  not  carry  it  between  them,  and  so  forth  to  the 

utmost  limit  of  tyrannous   absurdity." Naturally  these  Jews 

lacked  all  sympathy  with  Christ.  Worse  still ;  they  malignly 
hated  him.  His  whole  life  and  spirit  were  a  silent  but  terrible 
rebuke:  his  uttered  Avords  were  unendurably  scorching.  They 
must  be  rid  of  this  man  and  of  his  influence,  or  their  religion  and 
themselves  must  go  down  hopelessly  and  forevei-.  Hence  they 
seize  eagerly  upon  this  charge — "He  has  broken  the  Sabbath," 
and  they  intend  to  treat  it  as  a  capital  crime  punishable  with  death. 

17.  But  Je.9U3  answered  them,  My  Father  worketh  hither- 
to, and  I  work. 

This  answer  fully  justifies  the  remark  elsewhere  on  record — 
"  Never  man  spake  like  this  man."  All  suddenly  Jesus  plants 
himself  upon  the  highest  ground  possible.  He  enters  into  no  small 
discussion  over  the  details  of  Sabbath  prohibition,  into  no  minor 
questions  of  legal  interpretation.  He  does  not  urge  in  defense 
that  this  violation  of  the  Sabbath  was  rather  apparent  than  real ; 
that  it  was  a  very  trivial  matter ;  that  no  harm  was  done  ;  no  true 
worship  interrupted,  and  nothing  done  that  could  militate  against 
the  sacredness  of  the  day.  He  does  not  attempt  to  show  that  this 
healing  was  an  act  of  mercy;  that  it  was  kindness  to  the  man  to 
allow  him  to  take  away  all  the  little  property  he  had  in  the  world ; 
that  such  a  case  of  healing  might  properly  be  attested  before  the 
people  by  this  manifestation  of  restored  strength.  Nothing  of 
this  sort  is  thought  of.  On  the  contrary  Jesus  rises  at  once  to  the 
dignity  of  the  Son  of  God — authorized  therefore  to  do  what  his 
Father  had  ever  done  and  was  still  doing.  My  Father  whose  ex- 
ajnple  of  rest  from  creative  work  laid  the  foundation  for  the  Sab- 
bath command  has  never  rested  from  his  spiritual  work  for  the 
souls  of  men.  In  this  he  has  been  laboring  ever  since  the  creation 
of  the  world,  and  is  laboring  in  it  still.  I  am  only  doing  the  same. 
This  work  of  saving  the  souls  of  men  knows  no  law  of  Sabbath 
rest.  Walking  therefore  in  the  steps  of  my  Father  I  have  broken 
no  law;  my  work  has  the  sanction  of  the  highest  authority  in  the 
universe. This  was  indeed  taking  the  case  out  of  their  juris- 
diction. If  Jesus  had  a  right  to  say  what  he  did,  they  would  touch 
him  at  their  peril.  So  doing  they  would  come  into  collision  with 
the  Infinite  Son  of  God.  * 


92  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  V. 

18.  Therefore  the  Jews  sought  the  more  to  kill  him,  he- 
cause  he  not  only  had  broken  the  sabbath,  but  said  also  that 
God  was  his  Father,  making  himself  equal  with  God. 

With  their  A'iew  of  the  case,  their  course  is  by  no  means  sur- 
prising.  In  addition  to  the  first  charge — Sabbath-breaking — 

they  have  now  another — blasphemy — for  he  has  said  that  God  was 
his  own  Father  (so  the  best  textual  authorities) — thus  "  making 
himself  equal  with  God."  The  argument  in  the  reply  of  Jesus 
did  unquestionably  assume  a  substantial  equality  witii  God.  It 
claimed  for  Jesus  such  a  sonship  as  made  it  right  for  him  to  do 
what  his  Father  was  doing,  and  right,  because  his  Father  did  it. 
Because  God  wrought  with  unresting  labor  for  the  salvation  of 
human  souls,  therefore  Jesus  his  Son  might  and  ought  to  do  the 
same,  and  no  law  of  Sabbath  observance  could  restrain  him  from 
this,  as  no  law  to  this  effect  could  reach  his  Infinite  Father.  The 
Jews  therefore  can  not  be  accused  of  misinterpreting  his  words. 
In  those  words  Jesus  had  put  himself  on  an  equality  with  God 
in  dignity,  in  the  point  of  being  above  the  Mosaic  law  of  the  Sab- 
bath, and  of  having  the  right  to  do  all  that  his  Father  was  doing. 

19.  Then  answered  Jesus  and  said  unto  them,  Verily,  ver- 
ily, I  say  unto  you,  The  Son  can  do  nothing  of  himself,  but 
what  he  seeth  the  Father  do :  for  what  things  soever  he 
doeth,  these  also  doeth  the  Son  likewise. 

2Q.  For  the  Father  loveth  the  Son,  and  sheweth  him  all 
things  that  himself  doeth:  and  he  will  shew  him  greater 
works  than  these,  that  ye  may  marvel. 

The  case  is  fairly  opened,  and  Jesus  proceeds  to  define  more 
fully  his  relation  of  sonship  to  God  and  its  consequent  powers,  re- 
sponsibilities, and  duties.  Observe,  he  did  not  reply — You  mis- 
understand me ;  I  by  no  means  arrogate  to  myself  equality  with 
God;  I  would  not  be  understood  to  put  my  defense  on  that  foot- 
ing. This,  he  does  not  say ;  but  on  the  contrary,  with  most  sol- 
emn asseveration  he  declares — The  Son  does  nothing  of  his  own 
motion:  originates  no  plans;  strikes  out  into  no  schemes  of  his 
own,  but  simply  follows  the  example  of  his  Father.  The  Father 
in  the  truly  parental  spirit  loves  the  Son,  and,  therefore,  kindly 
shows  him  all  that  himself  is  doing  in  order  to  make  this  law  of 
his  Son's  life  evermore  plain  and  perfect;  and  will  go  on  to  yet 
greater  works  than  ye  have  yet  seen  at  Avhich  ye  will  marvel. 
JSut  all  will  follow  the  same  law — the  Father  making  his  own  work 
the  example  and  guide  for  his  Son. 

The  discussion  in  this  chapter  leads  us  into  the  profound  rela- 
tions between  the  Son  and  the  Father.  Some  readers  will  per- 
haps raise  the  question — In  what  precise  sense  does  Jesus  speak 

of  himself  as  "the  Son"? On  this  question  we  must  choose 

between  three  possible  (or  supposable)  alternatives:  (a.)  As  the 
divine  Logos — the  Eternal  Word— simply  and  only,  with  no  ref- 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  V.  93 

orcncc  to  a  human  nature  :  (b.)  As  human  only — the  mere  Man  of 
Nazareth,  born  of  Mary:  (c.  )0r  as  not  only  boi-n  of  woman,  but 
as  having  no  father  other  than  God — being  therefore  the  divine 

Logos  in  mysterious  union  with  the  babe  of  Bethlehem. Of 

these  three,  we  must  doubtless  accept  the  latter  as  being  the  only 
alternative  which  is  in  harmony  with  the  inspired  statements, 
Matt.  1 :  18,  20-23,  and  Luke  1 :  35 :  and  (what  is  not  less  decis- 
ive) the  only  one  which  corresponds  with  the  views  given  us  in 
our  author  John,  in  his  expressive  language,  "  The  Word  was 
made  flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us;  and  we  beheld  his  glory — the 
glory  as  of  the  only  begotten  of  the  Father"  (John  1 :  14).  This 
then  is  definitely  the  sense  in  which  Jesus  speaks  of  himself  in 
these  discussions  as  "  the  Son."  * 

21.  For  as  the  Father  raiseth  up  the  dead,  and  quicken- 
eth  them;  even  so  the  Son  quickeneth  whom  he  will. 

The  key  to  the  main  thought  of  the  passage  (vs.  21-29)  lies  in 
this  verse,  turning  essentially  on  the  point. — In  what  sense  is  the 
Father  said  here  to  raise  up  the  dead  ? — Premising  that  the  choice 

■•■■Dean  Alford,  commenting  on  the  word  "can"  (v.  19) — "The  Son 
ca7i  do  nothing  of  himself  "  (Greek, ((Waraz),  indulges  in  metaphysical 
discussion  of  the  point  whether  this  be  a  natural  ov  a  moral  impossi- 
bility, and  concludes  by  deciding  for  a  natural  and  necessary  and 
against  a  moral  agency  of  the  Son.  He  says — "Jesus  here  states 
that  he  can  not  work  any  but  the  works  of  God — can  not  by  this  very 
relationship  to  the  Father,  by  the  very  nature  and  necessity  of  the 
case; — the  a<p^eavTov  ('of  himself)  being  an  impossible  supposition, 
and  purposely  set  to  express  one.  The  Son  can  not  tvork  of  himself 
because  he  is  the  Son;  his  very  person  pre-supposes  the  Father's  will 
and  counsel  as  his  will  and  counsel,  and  his  perfect  knowledge  of 
that  will  and  counsel.  And  this  because  every  creature  may  abuse 
its  freedom  and  may  will  contrary  to  God;  but  the  Son,  standing  in 
essential  unity  with  God  can  not,  even  when  become  man,  commit 
sin — break  the  Sabbath — for  his  whole  being  and  work  is  in  and  of 
God." 

Underlying  these  speculations  are  two  assumptions  which  vitiate 
their  value;  viz.  (a.)  That  the  will  of  the  Son  is  not  only  harmoni- 
ous with  the  will  of  the  Father,  but  absolutely  and  necessarily  iden- 
tical, not  distinguishable  even  in  thought. This  is  wholly  at  va- 
riance with  the  drift  of  these  passages; — "The  Father  loveth  the 
Son  ;  "  "  The  Son  doeth  whatsoever  he  seeth  the  Father  do;  "  "As  the 
Father  raiseth  up  the  dead,  etc.,  so  the  Son  quickeneth  whom  he 
will." What  could  imply  distinct,  moral  personality  and  a  dis- 
tinct (not  identical)  moral  activity  if  these  words  do  not? 

(b.)  That  the  highest  supposable  excellence  is  the  product  of  7ie- 
cessiti/  not  of  freedom — which  is  equivalent  to  saying  that  the  efi'ects 
of  the  law  of  gravitation  are  infinitely  praiseworthy;  but  that  the 
free-hearted,  voluntary  love  and  obedience  of  a  morally  responsible 
mind  are  simply  dangerous  and  not  to  be  thought  of  as  in  esseaca 
morally  excellent. 
5 


94  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  V. 

must  lie  between  raising  up  dead  bodies  from  their  graves  and 
raising  dead  souls  to  new  life,  I  suggest  that  in  addition  to  what 
may  be  gathered  from  the  subsequent  context,  there  are  two  other 
legitimate  sources  of  evidence  on  this  question: — viz;  (a.)  The 
facts  out  of  which  this  discussion  arose,  together  with  the  discus- 
sion  itself  thus   far. (b.)    The   usage  of  the  Old  Testament. 

(a.)  Let  it  be  remembei'ed  that  this  discussion  arose  from  the  case 
of  quickening  power  which  went  forth  with  the  words,  "Rise: 
walk:" — a  case  much  more  directly  suggestive  of  the  morally 
quickening  energy  which  renews  men's  souls  than  of  that  power 
which  is  (in  the  great  future  day)  to  raise  dead  bodies.  That 
the  former  rather  than  the  latter  was  before  the  mind  of  Jesus 
seems  clear  from  the  words — "  My  Father  woi'keth  hithei-to" — 
for  this  working  was  rather  the  saving  of  men's   souls  than  the 

raising  of  their  bodies. (6.)  Old  Testament  usage  is  in  point 

because  this  discussion  is  had  with  Jews  to  whom  those  writings 
were  at  once  familiar  and  classic.  They  had  a  recognized  au- 
thority, and  commanded  a  professed  respect.  It  must  certainly 
be  assumed  that  these  words  were  intended  to  be  intelligible  to 
all  honest-minded  Jews,  and  hence  with  the  highest  probability 

would  be  in  harmony  with  Old  Testament  usage. Now  the  Old 

Testament  gives  some  well-defined  cases  of  the  spiritual,  i.  e.  fig- 
urative sense  of  resurrection  ;  e.  g.  Isa.  26:  14,  19  and  Ezek.  37: 
1-12.  On  the  other  hand,  in  its' literal  sense — raising  the  body 
from  its  grave,  the  word  resurrection  occurs  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment   but    rarely. These    considerations    strongly    favor   the 

sense  in  our  passage  of  raising  dead  souls  to  life. 

The  same  conclusion  is  strongly  supported  by  the  limitations 
as  to  the  application  of  this  resurrection  power  of  the  Son — "  quick- 
eneth  whom  he  will;"  for  when  he  raises  the  dead  from  their 
graves,  there  are  no  such  limitations :  "  all  shall  hear  his  voice 

and  come  forth." Moreover,  this  construction  is  put  beyond  all 

doubt  in  v.  24 — the  passing  from  death  unto  life  being  conditioned 
there  upon  hearing  the  words  of  Jesus  and  believing  on  the  Fa- 
ther as  having  sent  him. 

22.  For  the  Father  judgeth  no  man,  but  hath  committed 
all  judgment  unto  the  Son  : 

23,  That  all  men  should  honor  the  Son,  even  as  they 
honor  the  Father.  He  that  honoreth  not  the  Son  honoreth 
not  the  Father  which  hath  sent  him. 

The  logical  connection  throughout  vs.  20-22,  expressed  in  our 
version  by  "for"  (Greek  yap)  should  be  carefully  noticed.  This 
discourse  is  a  chain  of  reasoning,  every  point  bearing  upon  the 
relation  of  the  Son  to  the  Father  as  worthy  of  equal  honor,  and 
as  amply  justified  therefore  in  his  great  work  on  the  Sabbath. 

"Hath  committed  all  judgment  unto  the  Son" — suggests  the 
question  whether  the  reference  be  specially  to  the  final  judgment, 
subsequent  to  the  general  resurrection  ;  or,  more  comprehensively, 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  V.  95 

to  the  entire  administration  of  the  divine  moral  government  of 
our  world,  not  to  say  of  the  moral  universe.  The  latter  view  is 
favored  by  this  comprehensive  language — "  aZZ  judgment;"  also 
by  the  more  specific  reference  (v.  27)  to  the  "  authority  to  exe- 
cute judgment" — which  seems  to  look  particularly  to  that  of  the 
last  day.  In  the  comprehensive  sense — administering  "aZ^  judg- 
ment"— Jesus  dctei'mines  the  conditions  of  pardon  and  who  has 
fulfilled  them ;  the  control  of  the  entire  scheme  of  earthly  pro- 
bation, discipline,  preliminary  retribution  (as  in  the  present 
world) ;  every  thing  that  comes  under  the  head  of  the  executive 
administration  of  God's  moral  government  both  in  the  present 
life;  at  the  final  judgment;  and  throughout  the  realms  of  eternal 
retribution. 

The  reason  for  committing  all  judgment  in  this  broad  sense 
to  the  Son  is  given  plainly; — "that  all  should  honor  the  Son  even 
as  they  honor  the  Father."  Any  earthly  king  who  should  en- 
trust such  responsibilities  to  his  son  would  be  likely  to  do  it  for 
this  definite  purpose.  In  this  case  not  to  honor  the  Son  equally 
with  the  Father  is  to  dishonor  the  Father,  since  it  would  disre- 
gard his  avowed  purpose ;  would  be  construed  to  impugn  his  wis- 
dom ;  would  contemn  his  authority. 

We  can  not  fail  to  see  how  forcibly  all  this  bears  upon  the  great 
argument  of  Jesus  with  the  Jews  in  vindication  of  himself  for 
healing  the  impotent  man  and  bidding  him  carry  his  bed  on  the 

Sabbath. Nor  can  we  fail  to  see  its  incidental  bearing  as  proof 

of  his  true  divinity — none  the  less  forcible  for  being  incidental — 
an  assumption  underlying  the  entire  argument, 

24.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you.  He  that  heareth  my 
Avord,  and  believetli  on  him  that  sent  me,  hath  everlasting 
life,  and  shall  not  come  into  condemnation ;  but  is  passed 
from  death  unto  life. 

If  we  have  correctly  the  sense  of  the  words  "all  judgment"  in 
V.  22,  we  may  find  here  the  development  of  some  of  its  ground 
principles,  particularly  the  conditions  on  which  men  pass  from 
death  unto  life.  Hearing  the  words  of  Jesus  attentively  and  obe- 
diently; believing,  not  merely  on  me  [Jesus]  but  on  "him  that 
sent  me" — i.  e.  believing  on  me  as  one  sent  by  the  Father  and 
fully  commissioned  to  the  work  of  Savior  and  Judge — "he  hath 
everlasting  life,"  a  life  that  shall  begin  here  in  the  new  heart 
and  morally  changed  life,  and  shall  hold  on  unto  everlasting  life 
in  the  blessedness  of  the  redeemed.  He  shall  no  more  come 
into  condemnation — there  being  "no  condemnation  to  them  that 
are  in  Christ  Jesus"  (Rom.  8:  1).  This  man  has  passed  from  a 
state  of  death,  condemnation,  in  sin,  unto  life  in  God  and  his  in- 
finite favor. 

25.  Verily,  verih%  I  say  unto  you.  The  hour  is  coming, 
and  now  is,  when  the  dead  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son 
of  God :  and  they  that  hear  shall  live. 


86  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  V. 

With  solemn  asseveration  as  one  announcing  a  most  momentous 
trutli — "verily,  verily" — Jesus  declares  that  even  now  dead  souls 
are  hearing  the  voice  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  so  hearing  are 
passing  from  death  into  life.  We  can  scarcely  miss  the  refer- 
ence in  this  phraseology  to  the  voice  which  sent  life  thrilling 
through  the  bodily  organs  of  the  powerless  man  at  the  pool  of 
Bethesda.  So,  new  life  shall  breathe  through  the  souls  of  those 
who  listen  with  faith  and  obedience  to  the  voice  of  Jesus  calling 

them  to  him. The  hour  is  coming  when  the  numbers  saved  to 

new  life  shall  be  greatly  augmented :  even  now  the  work  is  glo- 
riously begun.  ■^^ 

26.  For  as  the  Father  hath  life  in  himself;  so  hath  he 
given  to  the  Son  to  have  life  in  himself; 

27.  And  hath  given  him  authority  to  execute  judgment 
also,  because  he  is  the  Son  of  man. 

Life  is  here  more  than  existence — the  main  str.ess  of  the  idea 
in  fact  goes  beyond  that  to  the  life-imparting  power.  As  the 
Father  has  in  himself  the  power  of  imparting  life,  so  has  he  given 
this  power  in  full  measure  to  the  Son.  And  also  "  authority  to 
execute  judgment,"  in  the  broad  sense  of  the  words  in  v.  22;  yet 
perhaps  with  a  drifting  toward  the  more  specific  sense  which  is 
so  fully  implied  in  vs.  28,  29.  This  is  specially  the  execution 
of  judgment;  not  only  the  judicial  decision  of  the  highest  tri- 
bunal but  the  carrying  of  that  decision  into  effect  in  the  final 
awards  of  destiny  according  to  deeds  done. 

"  Because  he  is  the  Son  of  man. "f  The  fact  of  the  incarnation 
is  made  the  reason  for  committing  all  judgment  to  Jesus  and  es- 
pecially, the  final  judgment  of  the  race.  Having  loved  this  fallen 
world  so  deeply,  so  tenderly,  that  he  could  consent  to  assume  our 
very  nature  and  suffer  in  it  even  unto  death,  who  throughout  all 
the  universe  will  ever  doubt  his  compassion,  his  pity,  his  heart 
to  save  whosoever  will  meet  his  revealed  conditions  and  put  him- 
self within  the  possible  reach  of  mercy?  With  infinite  confi- 
dence will  all  the  intelligent  universe  trust  him  for  ever  to  ad- 
minister the  final  judgment  in  the  truest  sympathy  fur  our  race 
and   never  with   undue   severity — inflicting   never  one  pang  of 

*  The  Sinaitic  manuscript  omits  the  clause  "and  now  is."  Other 
autliorities  with  great  unanimity  sustain  it.  It  is  supposable  that 
the  clause  was  omitted  to  make  the  passage  conform  to  v.  28.  But 
Jesus  doubtless  intended  a  contrast  between  that  verse  and  this.  In 
this,  the  process  is  already  begun:  in  that  it  waits  for  the  blast  of 
the  final  trumiJ  of  God. 

t  In  the  Greek  text  the  word  "Son"  lacks  the  article.  But  New 
Testament  usage  gives  other  similar  cases  of  its  omission;  e.cf.  Matt. 
14:  33,  and  27  :  43,  and  LuT^e  1 :  35,  and  John  19:  7.  The  sense  remains 
essentially  the  same  if  we  translate — "Because  be  is  a  Son  of 
man" — really  human;  truly  incarnated  into  the  race. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  V.  97 

suffering  in  excess  of  what  justice  must  domand.  That  lie  will 
care  tenderly  for  those  who  love  and  trust  him,  who  shall  ever 
doubt?  O,  how  will  he  gather  them  under  his  sheltering  wing 
and  hold  their  souls  sweetly  calm  and  joyful  under  the  blast  of 
the  gi-eat  trump  of  doom,  amid  the  opening, of  countless  graves, 
the  waking  of  the  dead  of  all  the  ages,  and  the  wreck  of  worlds! 

Moreover,  how  fitting  that  Jesus  should  sit  in  judgment  on 

those  who  heard  his  calls  of  mercy  only  to  i-efuse  them,  or  (as  the 
case  may  be)  to  repel  them  with  scorn;  who  ivould  not  believe 
on  his  name,  but  in  their  freedom  chose  their  lot  among  the  neg- 
lecters  of  this  great  salvation!  How  impressive  before  the  moral 
universe  that  the  same  voice  which  once  called  so  tenderly,  "  Come 
unto  me  for  life" — should,  in  the  great  final  day,  proclaim  with 
infinite  majesty  and  irreproachable  righteousness — "Depart  from 
me,  3^e  cursed!" 

Moreover,  the  entire  moral  universe  will  see  that  Jesus  richly 
deserves  this  honor  of  administering  and  executing  the  final 
doom  of  every  oue  of  the  human  race. 

28.  Marvel  not  at  this :  for  the  hour  is  coming,  in  the 
which  all  that  are  in  the  graves  shall  hear  his  voice, 

29.  And  shall  come  forth :  they  that  have  done  good,  unto 
the  resurrection  of  life ;  and  they  that  have  done  evil,  unto 
the  resurrection  of  damnation. 

"Marvel  not  at  this"  which  I  have  been  saying — the  word 
"this"  I'eferring  more  naturally  to  things  said  before  than  after. 
Let  it  not  surprise  you  that  the  Father  hath  given  me  power  to 
speak  dead  souls  to  life,  _/br,lIe  hath  given  me  the  power  to  bring 
dead  bodies  from  their  graves. 

"  For  the  hour  is  coming" — somev/here  in  the  future  ;  it  is  not 
said  where. — Observe,  Jesus  does  not  add — "And  now  is" — for 
this  form  of -resurrection  is  not  yet.  "In  which  all  that  are  in 
their  graves" — a  description  entirely  definite  and  unambiguous. 
He  does  not  say  as  in  v.  25,  "the  dead" — a  term  which  when 
plainly  distinguished  from  "those  in  their  graves"  describes  not 
bodies  but  souls,  spiritually  dead,  who  pass  from  this  death  into 

life  through  hearing  the  Savior's  word  and  believing. "Shall 

hoar  his  voice  " — keeps  up  the  analogy  Avith  v.  25, — the  word 
"  voice  "  in  both  cases  involving  some  allusion  to  that  voice  which 

said,  "  Rise  and  Avalk." That   this  resurrection  is  unicersal, 

extending  to  all  the  race,  is  shown  not  only  in  the  words,  "  all  that 
are  in  their  graves,"  but  in  the  specification  of  the  two  great  and 
only  classes — "  those  that  have  done  good"  and  "  those  that  have 
done  evil."  The  former  rise  with  a  "resurrection  unto  life" — • 
not  merely  existence  but  blessedness ;  the  latter,  to  a  resurrection 
followed  by  damnation. — The  same  truth  is  taught  by  Jesus  more 
in  detail  in  Matt;  25  :  31-46. 

30.  I  can  of  mine  own  self  do  nothing  :  as  I  hear,  I  judge  : 


98  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  V. 

and  my  judgment  is  just ;  because  I  seek  not  mine  own  ^vili, 
but  tlie  will  of  the  Father  which  hath  sent  me. 

Here  the  great  question  exegetically  is  whether  this  hearing  and 
judging  refer  specially  to  the  final  judgment,  or,  in  their  broadest 
possible  application,  to  the  whole  moral  administration  conducted 
by  Jesus.  The  latter  view  must  be  taken,  especially  because  Jesus 
uses  the  present  tense,  implying  that  this  hearing  and  judging  were 
then  in  progress ;  and  because  his  ai'gumentwitli  tlae  Jews  demands 
this  broad  application. 

Jesus  rests  his  claim  to  righteous  impartiality  upon  his  absolute 
freedom  from  selfishness.  He  seeks  only  the  Father's  will,  seek- 
ing that  supremely,  and  therefore  judges  with  perfect  equity. 

31.  If  I  bear  W'itness  of  myself,  my  Avitness  is  not  true. 

32.  There  is  another  that  beareth  witness  of  me ;  and  I 
know  that  the  witness  which  he  wituesseth  of  me  is  true. 

The  original  Greek  makes  the  contrast  strong  between  "I"  and 
"  another  "  as  witnesses  by  writing  out  "  ego  "  and  by  the  location 
of  "a^xoj" — [another].  If  I  were  the  only  witness  to  myself;  if 
the  Father  did  not  indorse  and  sustain  my  claim,  it  would  justly 
fall  to  the  ground.  But  "another"  is  my  witness,  even  God. — 
"  And  ye  know  " — the  reading  ye  being  better  sustained  than  "  I." 
Jesus  appeals  to  the  convictions  of  their  reason — ye  know  that  the 
testimony  which  God  the  Father  bears  to  me  must  be  true. 

33.  Ye  sent  unto  John,  and  he  bare  witness  tmto  the  truth. 

34.  But  I  receive  not  testimony  from  man  :  but  these  things 
I  say,  that  ye  might  be  saved. 

35.  He  was  a  burning  and  a  shining  light :  and  ye.  were 
willing  for  a  season  to  rejoice  in  his  light. 

"Ye  sent  unto  John" — as  recorded  above,  1  :  19-28.  He  testi- 
fied to  me  with  most  entire  truthfulness.  But  I  do  not  rely  chiefly 
or  specially  upon  the  testimony  of  any  man.  I  refer  to  John  the 
Baptist  only  in  the  hope  of  carrying  your  convictions  and  thus 
saving  your  souls.  He  brought  from  heaven  a  brilliant  light;  for 
a  season  ye  seemed  to  rejoice  in  that  light. — They  knew  very  well 
that  it  was  for  a  brief  season  only;  for  though  John  called  their 
attention  most  earnestly  and  emphatically  to  the  Greater  One  to 
come  after  him,  yet  when  they  came  to  know  this  Greater  One, 
they  repelled  and  rejected  him. 

John  was  a  light — i.  e. — a  lamp  ;  not  the  sun.  He  burned  and 
shone,  not  with  original  but  with  borrowed  light;  "  a  light  illumi- 
nated,  not   illuminating" — said  Augustine. John   "u-as,"  not 

is ;  for  at  the  time  of  this  conversation  he  had  been  cast  into  prison, 
or  perhaps  had  gone  to  the  executioner's  block. 

36.  But  I  have  greater  witness  than  that  of  John  :  for  the 
works  wdiich  the  Father  hath  given  me  to  finish,  the  same 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  V.  99 

works  that  I  do,  bear  witness  of  me,  that  the  Father  hath 
sent  me. 

37.  And  the  Father  himself,  which  hath  sent  me,  hath 
borne  witness  of  me.  Ye  liave  neither  heard  his  voice  at 
any  time,  nor  seen  his  shape. 

38.  And  ye  have  not  liis  word  abiding  in  you :  for  whom 
he  hath  sent,  him  ye  believe  not. 

Greater  witness  tlian  any  from  John  came  throuji;h  the  miracles 
which  he  wrought  by  virtue  of  his  connection  Avith  the  Father, 
and  which  were  the  Father's  own  indorsement  of  his  mission. 

Apart  from  these  miracles  was  yet  another  form  of  testimony 
from  the  Father  (v.  37).  What  was  this  other  form? — Not,  as 
some  have  supposed,  the  audible  voice,  heard  by  a  few  at  the 
baptism  of  Jesus,  or  that  heard  by  yet  fewer  at  his  transfiguration, 
for  manifestations  of  this  sort  seem  intentionally  excluded:  "Ye 
have  neither  heard  his  voice,  nor  seen  his  shape."  Nor  does  there 
seem  to  be  any  authority  for  supposing  a  reference  here  to  God's 
voice  to  man's  inner   consciousness — the  witness  of  the  Spirit. 

Nothing  in  the  passage  itself  or  in  the  context  favors  this  view. 

It  remains  to  find  this  new  testimony  in  God's  revealed  word — the 
Old  Testament  Scriptures.  We  are  sustained  in  this  finding  by 
what  immediately  follows — "  And  ye  have  not  his  word  abiding  in 
you."  God  has  given  you  in  the  Scriptures  most  decisive  testi- 
mony to  the  Messiah,  all  which  (Jesus  implies)  has  been  fulfilled 
in  myself;  but  alas!  as  to  you  this  is  unavailing,  because  God's 
revealed  word  does  not  abide  in  you ;  its  power  is  not  felt  in  your 
souls.  And  the  proof  of  this  is  that  ye  do  not — will  not — believe 
in  him  Avhom  God  has  sent.  There  could  be  no  stronger  proof 
than  this. 

39.  Search  the  Scriptures ;  for  in  them  ye  think  ye  have 
eternal  life :  and  they  are  they  which  testify  of  me. 

40.  And  ye  Avill  not  come  to  me,  that  ye  might  have  life. 

The  original  Greek — "Search  the  scriptures" — may  be  either 
indicative  or  imperative ;  the  statement  of  a  fact,  or  the  injunction 
of  a  duty.     Commentators   are   sharply,  perhaps  almost  equally 

divided  in  opinion  between  these  alternatives. The  indicative 

would  run  thus : — Ye  search  the  scriptures,  making  great  account 
of  them,  supposing  that  ye  have  eternal  life  in  them  even  in  your 
way  of  studying  and  obeying  them.  Yet  they  are  my  special 
witnesses  (so  the  Greek  puts  it;  they  are  the  witnesses  for  me) — 
a  fact  ye  are  too  blind  to  see.     Ye  will  not — choose  not  to — come 

to   me  for  life. But  as   imperative,  thus :    The  Father  bears 

Avitness  to  me  in  your  own  sacred  scriptures ;  but  this  word  of  the 
Father  ye  have  not  abiding  in  you.  Let  me  exhort,  yea  command 
you  to  search  those  scriptures,  as  ye  in  conscience  and  self-con- 
sistency ought  to  do,  for  ye  suppose  that  in  them  ye  have  eternal 
life,  and  they  testify  abundantly  of  me.     Ye  would  sec  this  testi- 


100  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  V. 

mony  if  your  eye  were  clear  and  your  hea,rt  honest.  But  alas  !  "ye 
will  not  come  to  me  that  ye  may  have  life."  The  settled  purpose 
of  your  obdurate  heart  is  wholly  against  coming  to  me. 

in  my  view  the  imperative  sheuld  have  the  preference  as  being 
more  in  harmony  Avith  facts,  and  in  a  moral  point  of  view,  more 
forcible. 

41.  I  receive  not  honor  from  men. 

42.  But  I  know  you,  that  ye  have  not  the  love  of  God  in 
you. 

"I  receive  not  honor,"  etc.,  strikes  by  contrast  at  the  root  of 
their  obdurate  rejection  of  Jesus — the  contrast  being  brought  out 
in  V.  44.  I  am  not,  like  yourselves,  poisoned  morally  by  a  de- 
praved ambition  for  the  glory  that  comes  from  men.  But  I  know 
your  heart ;  ye  have  no  love  of  God  in  you.  Your  love  runs  wholly 
toward  the  honor  that  comes  from  men.  The  first  great  precept 
of  your  law  (Deut.  6  :  4,  5)  enjoins  love  supreme,  with  all  the  heart, 
to  God.     Here  is  the  fatal  lack  in  your  souls. 

43.  I  am  come  in  my  Father's  name,  and  ye  receive  me 
not:  if  another  shall  come  in  his  own  name,  him  ye  will  re- 
ceive. 

Yet  how  uttcrl}"-  inconsistent  and  unreasonable !  Ye  are  look- 
ing with  extreme  and  even  passionate  eagerness,  for  some  great 
Coming  One  who  may  bring  salvation  to  Israel.  I  come  in  my 
Father'^s  name,  yet  ye  will  not  receive  me.  Despite  of  the 
Father's  indorsement  by  miracles,  and  by  the  testimony  of  your 
own  scriptures,  sustaining  my  claims,  ye  yet  reject  me.  But  if 
some  other  shall  come  in  his  own  name,  ye  will  readily  receive 
him — a  statement  borne  out  remarkably  in  the  subsequent  history 
of  the  Jewish  people.  The  number  of  false  Christs  who  did  ap- 
pear in  the  ages  subsequent  was  legion.  Many  of  them  drew  im- 
mense  throngs  of   followers. The  moral  explanation  of  this 

fact  is  simple.  Jesus  was  too  pure  and  the  leaders  of  Jewish 
thought  too  corrupt  to  admit  of  the  least  practical  sympathy. 
There  could  be  only  collision  and  repellency  between  the  meek, 
spotless  .Jesus,  and  the  bigoted,  covetous,  self-seeking,  sanctimo- 
nious Pharisees.  The  silent  rebuke  of  his  example  and  spirit 
stung  them :  his  words  of  rebuke  were  daggers  to  their  proud 
hearts. 

44.  How  can  ye  believe,  which  receive  honor  one  of 
another,  and  seek  not  tlie  honor  that  cometh  from  God 
only  ? 

These  few  words  reveal  the  root  and  mainspring  of  their  un- 
belief in  Jesus.  They  sought,  they  loved,  the  honor  that  came 
from  one  another:  they  neither  cared  for  nor  sought  the  honor 
which  came  from  God  only.  They  built  themselves  up  by  means 
of  mutual  admira-tion.     They  honored  each  other  according  as 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  V.  101 

they  wtjre  valiant,  and  mighty,  and  fierce  in  opposing  Jesus.  Ur^ 
dcr  the  poAvcr  of  this  master-passion,  how  could  they  possibly  be- 
lieve in  Jesus  ?  How  could  any  sort  or  amount  of  evidence  get 
into  their  mind,  force  conviction  upon  their  souls,  and  command 
the  homage  of  their  heart?  That  man  must  have  read  human 
nature  most  superficially  who  has  not  learned  the  power  of  an 
overmastering  passion  to  blind  the  mind  to  evidence,  and  make 
the  heart  as  adamant  against  the  voice  of  either  reason  or  con- 
science.  But  if  the}^  had  sought  the  honor  that  cometh  from 

God,  the  whole  course  of  their  thought  and  heart  would  have  been 
reversed.  For,  would  they  not  then  have  honored  the  Infinite 
Son  of  God  ?  Would  they  not  have  accepted  the  miracles  as 
God's  voice  through  the  realm  of  nature,  and  their  own  accredited 
scriptures  as  another  voice  from  God,  witnessing  to  his  predicted 
Son  ? 

45.  Do  not  think  that  I  v/ill  accuse  you  to  the  Father : 
there  is  one  that  accuseth  you,  even  Jsloses,  in  whom  ye  trust. 

46.  For  had  ye  belieyecl  Moses,  ye  would  haye  believed 
me  :  for  he  wrote  of  me. 

47.  But  if  ye  belieye  not  his  writings,  how  shall  ye  be- 
lieve my  words  ? 

Jesus  would  not  put  himself  forward  as  accusing  them  to  the 
Father.  We  must  take  his  words  in  this  comparative  sense  :  It 
is  not  so  much  myself  as  Moses  who  accuses  you.  1  came,  not  to 
condemn  but  to  save.  But  the  same  ]\Ioses  in  whom  ye  trust  and 
in  whose  name  je  glory  as  your  Great  Lawgiver,  your  model  pa- 
triarch, your  highest  ideal  of  a  Teacher  sent  from  God — he  ac- 
cuses you.  If  ye  had  truly  believed  him,  ye  would  have  believed 
me,  for  he  wrote  of  me;  described  me;  foretold  my  coming,  my 
character,  my  work.  But  since  ye  do  not  believe  his  writings,  how 
can  ye  believe  thj  words  ?  Their  professed  admiration  of  Moses 
is  thus  shown  to  have  been  utterly  fallacious — a  mere  delusion. 

Thus  closes  this  wonderful  discourse.  In  the  high  stand-point 
of  its  defense  against  the  charge  of  Sabbath  desecration  ;  in  the 
calm  and  solemn  majesty  of  its  tone ;  in  the  conscious  dignity 
with  Avhich  Jesus  set  forth  his  relation  to  the  Father;  in  the  per- 
tinence and  moral  force  of  his  presentation  of  himself,  first  as 
giving  spiritual  life  to  spiritually  dead  souls ;  and  next,  as  one 
day  to  give  life  from  the  dea,d  to  all  who  are  in  their  graves — re- 
vealing himself  thus  as  the  Infinite  Arbiter  of  all  human  destiny, 
the  Great  Judge  of  quick  and  dead — this  discourse  has  no  parallel 
in  human  language. 

How  was  it  received  by  the  Jewish  elders?  They  were  think- 
ing they  had  him  at  their  mercy  under  the  double  charge  of  Sab- 
bath-breaking and  blasphemy;  how  must  they  have  been  aston- 
ished at  his  defense :  I  have  violated  the  Sabbath  only  as  my  di- 
vine Father  does ;  I  work  only  as  he  works ;  he  shows  me  all  that 
he  is  doing;  1  fullow  his  example;  I  can  not  do  otherwise  than 


102  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  V. 

fulfill  the  mission  he  has  assigned  me.  I  raise  dead  soivls  into 
life  new  and  divine,  even  as  he  does;  and  ere  long  "  the  dead  in 
their  graves  shall  hear  my  voice  and  come  forth  " — to  their  eter- 
nal rcAvard. Thus  while  they  thought  to  arraign  him  at  their 

tribunal,  they  found  themselves  the  culprits  and  Jesus  their  final 
judge  ! Were  they  not  utterly  incredulous?  Did  they  not  re- 
pel every  point  in  these  statements  which,  admitted  as  true,  would 
have  been  fearfully  appalling?  No  doubt  we  must  for  the  most 
part  assume  this.  Jesus  assumed  it,  and  therefore  went  onto  sus- 
tain his  claims  by  appealing  to  the  testimony  of  John ;  to  the  in- 
dorsement which  the  Father  had  given  him  by  miracles,  and  Mo- 
ses by  his  prophetic  writings.  He  spake  to  them  calmly,  but  with 
most  searching  scrutiny  and  appalling  truthfulness,  of  the  reason 
why  they  could  not  believe  ;  of  that  passion  for  the  honor  coming 
from  men  which  made  them  utterly  blind  and  dead  to  the  claims 
of  the  Son  of  God.  He  said — "I  know  you  that  ye  have  not  the 
love  of  God  in  you."  I  know  you  that  though  ye  applaud  Moses, 
ye  will  not  believe  his  writings  in  their  Avitness  for  me.  I  know, 
alas  I  but  too  well  that  ye  simjily  will  not  come  to  me  that  ye  may 
have  life.  Solemnly  and  yet  sadly  we  must  suppose  Jesus  jDointed 
these  rebukes  and  bore  this  painful  testimony.  What  more  could 
he  do? 

Perhaps  the  inquiry  will  spring  up  in  some  minds  :  Why  did 
not  Jesus  drop  off  the  outer  vail  of  his  weak  humanity,  and  stand 
out  before  their  eyes  in  all  the  majesty  of  the  transfiguration,  or 
of  that  other  scene  of  his  unvailed  glories  before  him  of  Patmos 
— "  his  eyes  as  a  flame  of  fire  ;  "  "  his  face  as  the  sun  shineth  in 
its  strength ;  "  "  his  voice  as  the  sound  of  many  waters  "  ?  Then, 
like  the  ancient  seer,  they  might  have  "  fallen  at  his  feet  as 
dead."  But  it  is  not  the  wisdom  of  God  to  work  the  scheme  of 
human  probation  in  this  way.  To  overwhelm  is  not  to  convince. 
To  appall  is  not  to  persuade.  The  freest  moral  activities  of  hu- 
man souls  must  be  provided  for,  because  it  is  only  by  their  nor- 
mal working  that  radical  changes  in  moral  character  are  wrought. 
If  searching  truth — tenderly,  solemnly,  pungently  pressed  upon 
the  human  understanding  and  conscience — proves  unavailing,  all 
effort  is  hopeless ;  nothing  else  can  be  effective ;  and  men  must 
be  left  where  Jesus  was  compelled  to  leave  the  great  body  of  those 
Jewish  councilmen — to  the  infatuation,  blindness,  and  moral  death 
of  their  own  free  and  persistent  choice. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VI.  103 


CHAPTER    YI. 

The  historical  events  of  this  chapter  and  the  remarkable  dis- 
course to  which  they  gave  occasion  hinge  upon  the  feeding  of  five 
thousand  men  on  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Sea  of  Tiberias.  The 
account  of  this  miracle  fills  (vs.  1-14) ;  the  less  public  miracle 
of  walking  upon  the  sea  occurred  during  the  succeeding  night 
(vs.  15-21);  the  multitude  follow  him  to  Capernaum  the  next  day 
(vs.  22-25);  after  which  the  ensuing  conversation  presenting 
Jesus  as  the  "bread  of  life,"  fills  out  the  chapter  (26-71). 

1.  After  these  things  Jesus  went  over  the  sea  of  Galilee, 
which  is  the  sea  of  Tiberias. 

2.  And  a  great  multitude  followed  him,  because  they  saw 
his  miracles  which  he  did  on  them  that  were  diseased. 

The  events  of  this  chapter  seem  to  have  followed  those  of  chap- 
ter 5  at  no  long  interval. "  Went  over  the  Sea  of  Galilee,"  i.  e. 

from  the  western  side  where  lay  the  Galilean  homes  of  Jesus 
(Nazareth  and  Capernaum)  to  the  eastern  shore  near  which  were 
the  plain  where  .Jesu«  fed  the  five  thousand  and  the  mountain 
where  he  sat  with  his  disciples. 

This  great  multitude  were  following  him,  not,  like  the  Samari- 
tans, because  they  saw  in  him  the  long  expected  prophet  of  Is- 
rael, but  because  their  curiosity  and  interest  were  excited  by  hia 
miracles  of  healing. 

3.  And  Jesus  went  up  into  a  mountain,  and  there  he  sat 
with  his  disciples. 

4.  And  the  passover,  a  feast  of  the  Jews,  was  nigh. 
Comparing  this  narrative  with  that  given  bv  Matthew  (in  14: 

13-21);  by  Mark  (in  6:  30-44);  and  by  Luke"  (in  9:  10-17),  we 
find  that  Jesus  had  just  heard  of  the  murder  of  John  the  Baptist, 
and  that  the  disciples  had  but  recently  returned  from  their  first 
missionary  tour  "through  the  towns,  preaching  the  gospel  and 
healing  every-where."  The  inquisitive  people  were  thronging 
upon  him ;  thrilling  events  had  been  transpiring ;  it  was  a  time 
therefore  both  for  physical  rest,  and  yet  more,  for  instruction  and 
meditation.  The  disciples  needed  a  quiet  and  regtful  sitting  at 
the  feet  of  their  Master. 

That  "the  Passover  w^as  nigh"  seems  to  be  noticed  here  to  ac- 
count for  the  great  multitude  of  people  seeking  for  Jesus.  Some 
may  have  gathered  here  for  their  journey  to  Jerusalem  ;  others, 
living  more  remote,  may  have  tarried  here  a  season  on  their  way. 

5.  When  Jesus  then  lifted  up  his  eyes,  and  saw  a  great 
company  come  unto  him,  he  saith  unto  Philip,  Whence  shall 
we  buy  bread,  that  these  may  eat  ? 

6.  And  this  he  said  to  prove  him :  for  he  himself  knew 
what  he  would  do. 


104  GOSPEL  OF   JOHN.— CHAP.  VI. 

7.  Philip  answered  him,  Two  hundred  pennyworth  of 
bread  is  not  sufficient  for  them,  that  every  one  of  them  may 
take  a  little. 

8.  One  of  his  disciples,  Andrew,  Simon  Peter's  brother, 
saith  unto  him, 

9.  There  is  a  lad  here,  which  hath  five  barley  loaves,  and 
two  small  fishes :  but  what  are  they  among  so  many  ? 

10.  And  Jesus  said,  Make  the  men  sit  down.  Now  there 
was  much  grass  in  the  place.  So  the  men  sat  down,  in 
number  about  five  thousand. 

11.  And  Jesus  took  the  loaves;  and  when  he  had  given 
thanks,  he  distributed  to  the  disciples,  and  the  disciples  to 
them  that  were  set  down ;  and  likewise  of  the  fishes  as  much 
as  they  would. 

12.  When  they  were  filled,  he  said  unto  his  disciples, 
Gather  up  the  fragments  that  remain,  that  nothing  be  lost. 

18.  Therefore  they  gathered  them  together,  and  filled 
twelve  baskets  with  the  fragments  of  the  five  barley  loaves, 
which  remained  over  and  above  unto  them  that  had  eaten. 

This  miracle  is  the  only  one  recorded  by  each  of  the  four  evan- 
gelists.  Some  have  thought  it  the  same  as  that  recorded,  Matt. 

15 :  32-39  and  Mark  8  ;  1-10.  This  latter  is  similar  in  its  na- 
ture— a  miraculous  increase  of  food ;  but  is  too  unlike  in  most 
of  the  details  to  admit  the  supposition  of  identity.  For  in  this 
latter  the  people  had  been  with  Jesus,  mostly  fasting,  three  days ; 
the  bread  to  begin  with  was  seven  loaves  (not  five) ;  the  fishes 
not  "  two"  but  a  "few;  "  the  fragments  that  remained  were  seven 
baskets,  not  twelve.  The  people  in  this  latter  miracle  came,  "di- 
vers of  them,  from  far" — apparently  Genjtiles;  while  in  the  first 
miracle  they  were  Jews,  looking  toward  the  feast  at  Jerusalem. 
MoreoTer  it  is  scarcely  supposable  that  the  same  historian  would 
give  two  accounts  of  the  same  miracle — whether  with  or  without 
variations. 

Comparing  John's  narrative  of  this  miracle  with  that  given  by 
the  other  three  evangelists,  there  is  apparent  discrepancy  on  the 
point  of  the  immediate  antecedents — specially  on  the  question 
who  made  the  first  suggestion  of  their  need  of  food  and  of  the 
possible  means  of  supply.  The  other  three — often  called  "  the 
synoptists  " — concur  in  saying  that  the  first  suggestion  came  from 
the  disciples.  "  They  came  to  Jesus,  saying.  This  is  a  desert  place, 
and  the  time  is  now  past;  send  the  multitude  away,  that  they 
may  go  into  the  villages  and  buy  themselves  victuals,"  etc.  In 
John's  narrative  the  first  suggestion  named  came  from  Jesus  him- 
self: "He  saith  unto  Philip,  Whence  shall  we  buy  bread  that 
these  may  eat?  " 

In  view  of  this  apparent  discrepancy,  many  have  impugned  the 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VI.  105 

accuracy  of  the  gospel  historians,  and  have  thought  it  a  very 
grave  and  damaging  allegation. 

On  this  point  1  suggest {a.)  That  John  does  not  deny  Avhat 

the  other  three  assert  on  the  point  of  the  first  suggestion,  viz, 
that  it  came  from  the  disciples.  For  ought  that  John  relates,  the 
disciples  may  have  called  the  attention  of  Jesus  to  this  matter 
before  he  spoke  to  Philip  as  in  v.  5.  Admitting  this,  the  sup- 
posed discrepancy  mainly  if  not  wholly  vanishes.  The  difference 
between  the  first  three  and  John  is  chiefly  in  regard  to  the  omis- 
sion or  insertion  of  the  several  points — the  first  three  omitting 
things  which  John  records,  and  John  omitting  things  which  they 
record.  But  this  is  exceedingly  far  from  being  a  stubborn  and 
damaging  discrepancy. (6.)  The  minuteness  of  John's  narra- 
tive in  giving  the  names  of  Philip  and  of  Andrew  evinces  an  ac- 
curate  memory  and   entitles  his   statements   to   confidence. 

(r.)  But  finally,  these  points  are  of  very  minor  importance,  and 
the  diversity  in  these  four  narratives  on  points  so  trivial,  even  if 
it  did  involve  slight  discrepancies,  should  by  no  means  weaken 
our  confidence  in  their  entire  truthfulness  as  to  all  the  vital  mat- 
ters of  the  history.  Supreme  attention  to  the  things  that  are  vital 
will  often  involve  a  relative  inattention  to  points  unimportant. 
So  long  as  the  human  mind  is  less  than  infinite,  this  law  will 
surely  find  some  scope ;  an  absorbing  interest  in  the  things  of 
chief  concern  will  withdraw  attention  from  the  small  and  inci- 
dental points  so  that  slight  inaccuracies  as  to  them  will  become 

tlie  common  law. If  over  against  this  remark  it  be   said  that 

inspiration,  if  real,  ought  to  bring  in  the  infinite  mind  and  thus 
secure  perfect  accuracy  in  all  points  however  minute,  I  answer — 
AVhen  Inspiration  speaks  through  human  lips  and  pens,  its  style 
partakes  of  the  human  channel  through  which  it  flows.  Be  the 
philosophy  of  this  fact  what  it  may,  the  fact  itself  is  every-where 
obvious  and  therefore  simply  undeniable. 

In  this  narrative  the  points  requiring  verbal  explanation  are 
few.  V.  6  explains  the  reason  of  the  question  put  to  Philip,  viz : 
•to  call  his  attention  to  the  difficult  problem  of  feeding  so  many 
men,  and  to  see  what  he  had  to  say  of  it. — Not  that  Jesus 
needed  any  helpful  suggestions,  for  he  had  already  decided 
what  he  would  do.  Philip  estimates  the  amount  of  bread  requi- 
site for  a  moderate  supply  at  "  two  hundred  penny-worth."  As 
the  best  standard  of  money  value  the  world  over  and  through  all 
the  ages  of  human  history  is  the  amount  of  day  labor  it  repre- 
sents, we  find  our  best  measure  in  the  New  Testament  foct  that 
wages  then  ruled  at  a  penny  a  day.     Two  hundred  days'  work 

would  earn  this  amount  of  bread. The  other  evangelists  state 

that  the  men  were  seated  on  the  grass  by  hundreds  and  by 
fifties — a  method  which  made  enumeration  easy  and  reasonably 

correct. The    "  baskets  "    which  received  the   fragments  were 

the  common  traveling  baskets  of  that  age,  adapted  to  carry  pro- 
visions for  a  journey. 

As  to  the  special  nature  and  the  moral  value  of  this  miracle, 


106  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAr.  VI. 

let  it  be  noted — — («.)  It  thoroughly  precluded  deception.  Five 
thousand  hungry  men  are  very  certain  to  know  beyond  mistake 
whether  or  not  they  have  been  honestly  fed  and  their  stomachs 
really  satisfied. (b.)  The  people  had  no  conceivable  induce- 
ment to  connive  at  deception.  So  far  as  appears  they  avouIcI  have 
detected  and  exposed  a  fraud  (if  there  had  been  any)  as  indig- 
nantly as  any  modern  skeptic,  living  then,  would  have  done. 

(c.)  This  feeding  made  all  the  impression  upon  the  people  which 
a  real  miracle  could  have  made,  for  we  see  that  they  Avere  ready 
to  "take  Jesus  by  force  to  make  him  their  king."  Some  of  them 
followed  him  the  nest  day  over  to  the  other  side  of  the  lake  as 
men  thoroughly  convinced  that  this  was  surely  "  that  great  Prophet 

Avho  should  come  into  the  world"  (v.  14.) (d.)  The  service  of 

Avaiting  upon  this  vast  company  would  naturally  impress  the  mir- 
acle forcibly  upon  the  disciples.  No  wonder  they  never  forgat 
it.  No  wonder  that  the  record  of  it  has  found  place  in  each 
one  of  the  gospel  histories. (e.)  The  order  to  saA-e  all  the  frag- 
ments that  remained  Avould  perpetuate  the  impression  of  the 
scene,  and  be  withal  a  Avholesome  lesson  in  economy — not  to  say 
also,  would  obviate  a  possible  abuse  of  this  miracle  in  the  shape 
of  a  feeling  that  henceforth  they  were  sure  of   perpetual  plenty 

and  might  afford  to  waste. (f.)  And    finally,   this    bountiful 

supply  is  beautifully  typical  of  the  fullness  of  spiritual  bread  in 
our  Father's  house — "  bread  enough  and  to  spare  " — so  that  ncA^er 
a  man  need  to  suffer  from  hunger  (Luke  15:  17),  miserable  prod- 
igal though  he  may  have  been. 

14.  Then  those  men,  when  they  had  seen  the  miracle 
that  Jesus  did,  said.  This  is  of  a  truth  that  Prophet  that 
sliould  come  into  the  world. 

15.  When  Jesus  therefore  perceived  that  they  Avould  come 
and  take  him  by  force,  to  make  him  a  king,  he  departed 
again  into  a  mountain  himself  alone. 

Does  this  reference  to  "  the  Prophet  that  should  come  into  the 
AA^orld"  look  specially  to  Deut.  18:  15,  18?  Apparently  so;  and 
yet  their  thought  to  make  him  their  king  suggests  that  they  saw 
in  him  their  nation's  Messiah,  and  applied  to  him,  not  that  one 
prediction  only,  but  the  great  body  of  Old  Testament  prophecy. 
Restive  under  the  Roman  yoke,  ever  aspiring  to  national  inde- 
pendence and  greatness,  nothing  could  be  more  congenial  to  their 
ambition  than  a  king  of  their  own  who  should  lift  their  nation  at 

once  to  power  and  glory. But  Avith  this  feeling  of  theirs,  Jesus 

had  not  the  least  sympathy.  To  yield  to  their  notion  would  haA^e 
been  to  abandon  the  purpose  for  which  he  had  come  into  the 
world:  would  have  fired  into  flame  the  hardly  suppressed  ambition 
of  even  his  disciples  ;  and  must  have  prostrated  all  his  efforts  for 
the  spiritual  regeneration  of  Israel. 

16.  And  Avhen  even  Avas  notv  come,  his  disciples  Avent 
doAvn  unto  the  sea, 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VI.  107 

17.  And  entered  into  a  sliip,  and  went  over  the  sea  to- 
ward Capernaum.  And  it  was  now  dark,  and  Jesus  was  not 
come  to  them. 

18.  And  the  sea  arose  by  reason  of  a  great  wind  that 
blew. 

19.  So  Avhen  they  had  rowed  about  five  and  twenty  or 
thirty  furlongs,  they  see  Jesus  walking  on  the  sea,  and  draw- 
ing nigh  unto  the  ship  :  and  they  were  afraid. 

20.  But  he  saith  unto  them,  It  is  I ;  be  not  afraid. 

21.  Then  they  willingly  received  him  into  the  ship:  and 
immediately  the  ship  was  at  the  land  whither  they  went. 

The  scenes  of  this  eventful  ni;!;ht,  briefly  sketched  here,  appear 
more  fully  in  Matthew  (14:  22-33);  also  in  Mark  (G  :  45-52),  but 
are  omitted  in  Luke.  The  cii-cumstances  in  full  were  these  : — 
that  Jesus  sent  the  disciples  back  by  water  without  him,  remain- 
ing himself  to  dismiss  the  people ;  then  went  up  into  the  moun- 
tain to  pray,  and  when  evening  had  come  was  there  alone  ;  that 
a  fearful  wind-storm  fell  upon  the  lake — a  head-wind  to  the  toil- 
ing disciples  and  their  crew;  that  they  had  made  only  some  three 
or  four  miles  of  their  voyage — scarcely  more  than  half  across, 
when,  far  on  toward  morning,  Jesus  appeared,  walking  on  the 
surging  billows ;  that  they  saw  the  strange  sight,  thought  it  a 
phantom,  and  "  cried  out  for  fear;  "  that  then  the  sweet  and  well 
known  voice  fell  on  their  ear — "Be  of  good  cheer,  it  is  I:  be  not 
afi'aid;" — to  which  words,  their  most  impulsive  man,  Peter,  re- 
sponded :  "  Lord,  if  it  be  thou,  bid  me  come  to  thee  on  the  water." 
"Come,"  said  Jesus:  and  forth  from  the  ship  Peter  sallies,  man- 
aging apparently  to  get  on  well  so  long  as  his  eye  was  upon  Je- 
sus; but  dropping  his  eye  to  the  tossing  waves,  and  struck  by  the 
stiff  blasts,  a  tremulous  fear  came  over  him,  and,  beginning  to 
sink,  he  cried,  "  Loi'd,  save  me ; "  whereupon  Jesus  put  forth 
his  hand,  caught  and  saved  him; — with  however  the  gentle  re- 
Imke — "O  thou  of  little  faith,  wherefore  didst  thou  doubt?"  Ac- 
cording to  John  the  disciples  were  now  wishing  to  take  him  into 
the  ship,  and  presently  the  ship  was  in  the  haven  they  sought. 
Mark  omits  these  circumstances  respecting  Peter  (why  ?)  saying 
however  that  Jesus  seemed  about  to  pass  by  them,  but,  hearing 

their  cry  of  fear  and  alarm,  came  up  to  them  into  the  ship. 

Remarkably  in  referring  to  the  moral  impressions  of  the  scene 
upon  the  disciples,  Matthew  gives  prominence  to  their  joyous  tes- 
timony to  his  divine  sonship; — "  They  worshiped  him,  saying, 
Of  a  truth  thou  art  the  Son  of  God;"  while  Mark  says,  "They 
were  sore  amazed  in  themselves  and  wondered ;  for  they  con- 
sidered not  the  miracle  of  the  loaves ;  for  their  heart  was  hard- 
ened." Thus  ]\ratthew  testifies  that  their  faith  was  refreshed  and 
specially  manifested ;  while  Mark  seems  to  have  been  impressed 
by  their  moral  dullness  and  unbelief  in  not  appreciating  the  force 
of  the  recent  miracle.     Shall  we  explain  this  apparent  discrep- 


108  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VI. 

ancy  by  supposing!;  that  the  moral  attitude  of  the  twelve  was  not 
a  unit — a  part  of  them  being  described  by  Matthew;  another  part 

by  Mark? It  is  hard  for  us  to  conceive  how  such  a  scene  could 

have  failed  to  be  sweetly  and  most  deeply  impressive  upon  them 
all. 

22.  The  day  following,  when  the  people,  which  stood  on 
the  other  side  of  the  sea,  saw  that  there  was  none  other 
boat  there,  save  that  one  whereinto  his  disciples  vrere  en- 
tered, and  that  Jesus  went  not  with  his  disciples  into  the 
boat,  but  that  his  disciples  were  gone  away  alone; 

23.  Howbeit  there  came  other  boats  from  Tiberias  nigh 
unto  the  place  where  they  did  eat  bread,  after  that  the 
Loi'd  had  given  thanks: 

24.  When  the  j^eople  therefore  saw^  that  Jesus  was  not 
there,  neither  his  disciples,  they  also  took  shipping,  and 
came  to  Capernaum,  seeking  for  Jesus. 

25.  And  when  they  had  found  him  on  the  other  side  of 
the  sea,  they  said  unto  him,  Eabbi,  Avhen  earnest  thou 
hither  ? 

It  seems  that  the  efforts  of  the  Master  to  send  the  five  thousand 
away  to  their  homes  or  onward  in  their  journey,  were  not  alto- 
gether successful.  Some  of  them  at  least  are  soon  on  hand  again, 
carefully  noting  that  the  disciples  were  sent  on  board  ship  to 
cross  the  lake  alone  (without  their  Master),  and  in  the  only  boat 
which  lay  in  sight.  Other  boats  came  up,  however,  during  the 
night,  driven  over  perhaps  by  the  same  wind-storm  against  which 
the  disciples  contended  during  that  fearful  night.  Entirely  un- 
certain where  Jesus  might  be,  they  entered  these  boats  and  crossed 
over  to  Capernaum,  seeking  for  Jesus,  their  first  question  on  finding 
him  being  naturally  this: — "Rabbi,  how  earnest  thou  hither?" — 
Did  they  ever  learn  that  he  tcalked  over  those  surging  billows  ? 
He  took  no  pains  to  exhibit  or  in  any  way  disclose  this  miracle, 
but  turns  his  thoughts  and  theirs  to  their  low  and  unworthy  aims 
in  seeking  him,  and  to  the  far  nobler  aims  they  should  have  had — 
as  we  shall  see. 

26.  Jesus  answered  them  and  said,  Verily,  verily,  I  say 
unto  you.  Ye  seek  me,  not  because  ye  saw  the  miracles,  but 
])ecause  ye  did  eat  of  the  loaves,  and  Avere  filled. 

27.  Labor  not  for  the  meat  which  perisheth,  but  for  that 
meat  which  endureth  unto  everlasting  life,  which  the  Son 
of  man  shall  give  unto  you :  for  him  hath  God  the  Father 
sealed. 

They  had  been  fed  by  miracle,  yet  it  was  not  the  miracle  but 
the  feeding  that  had  impressed  them  and  that  drew  them  on  after 
him.     Strangely  thej'^  failed  to  accept  the  miracle  in  its  true  in- 


GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  VI.  109 

tent  and  fur  its  real  value;  they  did  not — perhaps  rather  wovld 
not — see  in  it  the  Father's  indorsement  of  his  Son  as  the  Infi- 
nite Fountain  of  life  to  dying  men.  This  great  and  fatal  foilure 
on  their  part  prompted  the  exhortation — "Labor  not  for  bread 
that  perishes,  but  for  that  which  endures  unto  everlasting  life" — 
such  as  the  Son  of  man  gives  you;  for  him  hath  the  Father 
commissioned,  indorsed,  and  set  apart  for  this  very  service,  seal- 
ing his   credentials   by  miracles,   as  ye   should   have    seen. 

"Meat" — not  flesh  but  food;  and  here  better  in  the  special 
sense — bread — as  in  the  subsequent  context — "the  bread  of  life." 
The  laws  of  thought  by  Avhich  Jesus  reached  the  figure  here — 
"  the  bread  of  life  " — are  at  once  obvious  and  beautiful.  Com- 
mon bread  had  been  multiplied  by  Jesus  for  the  feeding  of  the 
five  thousand;  they  had  eaten  it  and  were  filled;  and  were  now 
with  no  little  labor  following  after  him  for  more.  Jesus  says 
to  them — There  is  other  and  better  bread  than  what  ye  seek — • 
bread  that  both  satisfies  and  endures — the  latter  point,  in  the 
case  of  the  bread  as  in  the  case  of  the  water  commended  to  the 
Avoman  of  Samaria — being  the  distinctive  test.  This  bread  en- 
dures unto  and  naturally  ensures  everlasting  life.  It  brings  into 
human  souls  the  very  life  of  God.  It  is  the  mission  of  his  Son 
to  give  it.  Ye  are  seeking  of  me  only  bread  that  perishes;  the 
thing  ye  should  seek  of  me  is  the  bread  that  endures  and  gives 
life  forever. 

28.  Then  said  they  unto  him,  What  sliall  we  do,  that  we 
might  work  the  Avorks  of  God  ? 

29.  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them.  This  is  the  work 
of  God,  that  ye  believe  on  him  wliom  he  hath  sent. 

Our  translators  Avould  have  indicated  the  course  of  thought 
bettor,  if  following  the  original  Greek,  they  had  put  it — "  Work 
not  for  the  meat  that  perishes"  (v.  27);  and  "What  shall  we  do 
that  we  may  loorlc  the  works  of  God?"  (v.  28).  The  Jews  took  up 
the  identical  word  which  Jesus  had  used,  inquiring, — What  is 
the  loork  Avhich  thou  wouldest  enjoin?  What  loork  is  this  which 
God  requires? — To  this  Jesus  replies,  "This  is  the  work"  God 
enjoins — "that  ye  believe  on  him  whom  he  hath  sent."     The 

one  great  work  which  God  expects  of  you  is  faith  in  7iis  Son. 

To  Jews,  toilsomely  working  out  their  salvation  (as  they  sup- 
posed) by  external  works  of  meritorious  righteousness,  it  was  su- 
premely pertinent  and  fitting  to  say — Faith  in  Jesus  is  the  one 
comprehensive  work  required  by  God.  Here  was  an  Infinite 
Savior.  To  accept  him  in  true  faith  was  then  and  is  evermore 
the  one  condition  of  salvation. 

30.  They  said  therefore  unto  him,  What  sign  showest 
thou  tlien,  that  we  may  see,  and  believe  thee?  what  dost 
tliou  work? 

31.  Our  fathers  did  eat  manna  in  the  desert;  as  it  is 
written,  He  gave  them  bread  from  heaven  to  eat. 


110  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VI. 

"  The  Jews  (said  Paul,  1  Cor.  1 :  22)  requii'e  a  sign  " — evermore 
demanding,  never  satisfied  with  the  miracles  exhibited  before 
them.  Only  the  evening  before,  five  thousand  of  them  had  been 
fed  to  the  full  on  five  loaves  and  two  small  fishes ;  and  still  they 
demand  more  sign — as  if  Jesus  had  never  given  them  any  reli- 
able sign  of  his  divine  mission!  "That  we  may  sec  and  believe 
thee " — as  if  they  were  entirely  ready  to  believe  if  only  they 
could  have  the  appropriate  evidence.  "What  dost  thou  work?" 
has  the  tone  of  sheer  insult  when  construed  in  the  light  of  the 
miracle  then  fresh  as  the  scenes  of  yesterday.  How  weakly  and 
wickedly  they  assume  that  the  miracle  they  had  just  seen  should 
go  for  nothing !  Perhaps  they  had  some  preconceived  notions  as 
to  the  sign  that  Jesus  in  their  view  ought  to  give ;  and  unless 
they  could  bring  him  to  their  idea  would  accept  nothing. 

The  Jews  first  suggested  the  manna  which  their  fathers  ate  in 
the  desert — an  illustration  which  Jesus  subsequently  resumed 
twice  (vs.  49,  58).  We  may  suppose  the  course  of  their  thought 
to  have  been  on  this  wise: — He  bids  us  work  for  bread  that  en- 
dures unto  everlasting  life,  and  speaks  of  giving  it  to  us  himself 
and  of  coming  down  from  heaven,  sealed  of  God.  But  our 
fathers  had  bread  from  heaven,  and  yet  it  did  not  endure  unto 
everlasting  life.  Would  he  pretend  to  have  any  thing  better  than 
that?  So  the  woman  of  Samaria  could  not  see  how  Jesus  could 
have  any  better  water  than  that  of  Jacob's  well. 

The  reference — "it  is  written" — is  to  Ps.  78:  24,  25,  where  in 
poetic  imagery  God  is  said  to  have  "given  them  of  the  corn 
[bread]  of  heaven."  The  manna  actually  fell  with  the  dew  from 
the  lower  heavens — the  atmosphere  above  them;  and  more  than 
this, — God's  hand  was  so  signally  in  it  that  with  striking  pro- 
priety, it  could  be  said  to  have  come  down  from  his  abode — 
heaven. 

32.  Then  Jesus  said  unto  them,  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto 
you,  Moses  gave  you  not  that  bread  from  heaven  ;  but  my 
Father  giveth  you  the  true  bread  from  heaven. 

33.  For  the  bread  of  God  is  he  which  cometh  down  from 
heaven,  and  giveth  life  unto  the  world. 

Jesus  speaks,  not  according  to  the  license  of  poetry  but  to  the 
precision  of  prosaic  fact.  That  manna-bread  Moses  did  not  send 
down  from  the  true — the  real  heaven ;  but  my  Father  (said  Jesus) 
gives  to  men  blessings  most  worthy  to  be  called  the  true  bread 
from  heaven.  Jesus  then  advances  to  the  yet  higher  idea — that 
this  bread  from  heaven  is  a  real,  living  peison  who  comes  down 
from  heaven  and  gives  life  to  the  world.  Apparently  in  this  form 
of  statement,  Jesus  fell  slightly  short  of  saying — It  is  I  myself 

34.  Then  said  they  unto  him,  Lord,  evermore  give  us  this 
bread. 

Here  is  the  woman  of  Samaria  repeating  herself.  As  she  said 
(John  4:  15) — "Give  me  this  water  that  1  thirst  not;  "  so  under 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.—CHAr.  VI.  Ill 

their  first  impulse  these  Jews  said;  "Lord,  evermore  give  us  this 
bread."  Alas,  that  they  should  have  so  poorly  understood  their 
own  words ! 

35.  And  Jesus  said  unto  them,  I  am  the  bread  of  life  :  lie 
that  coraeth  to  me  shall  never  hunger ;  and  he  that  believeth 
on  me  shall  never  thirst. 

Jesus  here  advances  to  the  further  point  of  identifying  this 
person — "he  who  comcth  down  from  heaven" — with  himself: — 

"  I  am  the  bread  of  life." This  bread  is  to  be  tested  and  known 

by  its  effects.  Like  the  water  described  to  the  woman  of  Samaria, 
it  forever  satisfies;  it  meets  the  great  moral  want  in  man's  soul — 

meets  it  perfectly  once  and  forever. Yet  one  other  truth  lies 

in  this  first  Avonderful  statement;  viz.,  "Coming  to  Jesus"  is  the 
true  sense  of  eating  this  bread  of  life.  He  that  comes  to  Jesus 
does  in  that  act  eat'this  life-giving  bread ;  just  as  believing  on  him 
is  equivalent  to  drinking  the  waters  of  life.  Who  drinks  shall 
never  thirst  more. 

36.  But  I  said  unto  you,  That  ye  also  have  seen  me,  and 
believe  not. 

Some  preachers  would  have  caught  up  the  words — "  Lord,  ever- 
more give  us  this  bread" — as  proof  of  conversion.  Jesus  goes 
deeper;  knows  his  men  better;  seeks  rather  to  make  real  converts 
than  to  count  them.  lie  may  repel  some  ;  he  must  deal  with  them 
fiithfully. — As  I  have  told  you  before,  so  now  again: — ^ye  have 
seen  me  and  have  not  believed.  Ye  have  not  lived  up  to  your 
light.     This  bread  of  life  has  been  before  you,  oifered  freely — and 

ye  icould  not  take  it. Let  them  not  deceive  themselves.    If  they 

will,  it  shall  not  be  through  any  lack  of  faithful,  pointed  instruc- 
tion from  the  world's  great  model  preacher. 

37.  All  that  the  Father  giveth  me  shall  come  to  me ;  and 
him  that  cometh  to  me  I  will  in  nowise  cast  out. 

It  behooves  us  to  study  these  words  and  the  analogous  passage 
(vs.  44,  45)  very  carefully  and  withal  thoroughly. Jesus  inti- 
mates that  he  does  not  expect  all  men  to  come  to  him  for  life,  but 

only  all  whom  the  Father  hath  given  to  him. Pausing  a  moment 

over  this  fact  as  developed  in  vs.  36-45,  I  suggest  these  three  in- 
quiries: — (1.)  Wlvj,  may  we  suppose,  did  Jesus  put  this  truth 
before  these  Jews  in  this  form? — (2.)  How  are  those  who  are 
"given  by  the  Father  to  the  Son"  described  and  to  be  known? — 
(3.)  How  is  this  doctrine  guarded  against  abuse — especially  the 
abuse  of  discouraging  sinners  from  coming  to  Christ? 

To  the  first  point  I  answer  suggestively — Perhaps  because  those 
Jews  with  estremest  self-righteousness  claimed  to  be  the  chosen 
and  specially  favored  people  of  God,  and  because  they  gloried  in 
this  claim.  Jesus  therefore  may  have  sought  to  show  them  that 
this  claim  was  utterly  groundless. — If  ye  were  indeed  God's  chosen 


112  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VI. 

people,  liOAv  surely  ye  -would  receive  and  honor  his  Son;  how  cer- 
tainly would  ye  be  taught  of  God  and  come  in  solid  masses  to  hear 
the  words  of  his  Son  and  to  welcome  from  his  hand  the  broad  and 
the  waters  of  life. — The  intended  effect  of  these  statements  may 
therefore  have  been  to  show  these  Jews  tliat  they  entirely  miscon- 
ceived their  own  moral  attitude  toward  the  Father. (2.)  On  the 

second  point  (above  named)  we  may  know  ivho  are  given  to  Jesus 
by  the  Father,  for  all  such  will  come  to  him.  Their  coming  iden- 
tities them. (3.)  No  rational  ground  is  aiforded  for  abusing  the 

doctrine  as  here  put,  for  no  matter  who  comes  to  Jesus,  ho  shall 
in  nowise  be  cast  out.  Let  no  sinner  be  deterred  by  the  fear  that 
he  is  not  one  of  those  who  are  "given  to  Jesus"  by  the  Father. 
Let  him  settle  that  question  in  his  own  favor  by  coming  to  Jesus 
at  once — coming  with  all  his  heart — coming,  not  as  worthy  but  as 
invited  and  as  made  welcome.  This  assurance-^the  coming  one 
never  cast  out — was  put  by  the  Master  in  the  very  best  place 
possible. 

38.  For  I  came  down  from  heaven,  not  to  do  mine  own 
will,  but  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me. 

39.  And  this  is  the  Father's  will  which  hath  sent  me,  that 
of  all  which  he  hath  given  me  I  should  lose  nothing,  but 
should  raise  it  up  again  at  the  last  day. 

40.  And  this  is  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me,  that  every 
one  which  seeth  the  Son,  and  belie veth  on  him,  may  have 
everlasting  life :  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day. 

The  logic  expressed  by  "  for"  (v.  38) -should  refer  specially  to 
the  last  clause  of  the  verse  preceding  rather  than  to  the  first,  for 
it  should  look  to  what  Jesus  does  and  not  to  Avhat  the  Father  does; 
thus :  I  will  never  cast  out,  but  will  surely  save  to  the  uttermost 
all  who  come  to  me ;  for  I  came  down  from  heaven  to  do  not  my 
will  but  his ;  and  his  will  is  that  1  should  save  and  never  cast  out 
those  whom  he  has  given  me. This  will  of  the  Father  is  ex- 
panded and  reiterated  in  most  striking  words  (vs.  39,  40). Let 

the  reader  note  carefully  in  what  points  these  verses  are  the  same 
and  in  what  they  differ.  They  are  the  same  in  that  they  both 
define  the  will  of  the  Father  in  sending  Jesus — especially  that  he 
should  save  every  one  of  a  certain  defined  class,  losing  none,  but 
saving  them  all  unto  everlasting  life,  even  unto  the  raising  them 
up,  saved  soul  and  body,  at  the  last  day.  On  the  other  hand  they 
differ  in  this  one  respect,  viz.,  that  the  class  referred  to  are  de- 
scribed in  one  verse  as  given  to  Jesus  by  the  Father ;  in  the  other, 
as  seeing  the  Son  and  believing  on  him.  That  is,  the  first  puts 
forward  into  the  foreground  the  agency  of  God;  the  second,  the 
agency  of  man.  That  the  class  is  in  each  case  identically  the 
same  can  not  be  doubted.  They  may  be  described  in  either  of 
these  two  ways — either  as  given  by  the  Father  to  the  Son ;  or  as 
seeing  the  Son  and  believing  in  him.  Each  fact  and  both  arc 
descriptive  and  serve  equally  well  to  identify.     The  former  fact 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VI.  113 

(may  wc  not  say)  insures  the  latter ;  and  yet  insures  it  in  a  way 
which  by  no  means  interferes  with  human  agency — much  less 
supersedes  it. 

The  certainty  of  ultimate  salvation  for  all  who  fall  within  these 
descriptive  terms — "Given  by  the  Father  to  the  Son;"  "  Seein"; 
Jesus  and  believing  on  him" — is  the  main  point  specially  aiSrmcd 
here.  I  see  not  how  any  human  language  could  be  more  explicit 
and  decisive  to  this  point  of  certainty  than  what  we  read  here.* 

41.  The  Jews  tlieii  murmured  at  liim,  because  he  said, 
I  am  the  bread  which  came  down  from  heaven. 

42.  And  they  said,  Is  not  this  Jesus,  the  son  of  Joseph, 
whose  father  and  mother  we  know  ?  how  is  it  then  that  he 
saith,  I  came  down  from  heaven  ? 

The  Jews  murmured  at  him,  complaining,  objecting,  repelling 
— not  what  he  had  said  of  the  Father's  agency  in  giving  him 
those  who  should  come  to  him;  but  more  fundamentally  because 
he  claimed  to  have  come  down  from  heaven — the  bread  of  life 
for  men.  They  said — Do  we  not  know  all  about  this  Jesus? 
Have  we  not  seen  both  his  father  and  his  mother?     How  then 

can  he  say — "  I  came  down  from  heaven  "  ? The  evidence  of 

his  miracles  they  seem  to  have  thrown  out  utterly:  the  purity  of 
his  life,  and  the  inimitable  perfection  of  his  teachings,  fell  pow- 
erless on  their  souls.  Possibly  they  had  some  notions  of  their 
own  as  to  the  manner  in  which  their  Messiah  ought  to  come 
down  from  heaven — supposably,  in  a  blaze  of  glory ;  a  chariot  of 
lire ;  or  with  the  peal  of  the  archangel's  trump :  but  if  God 
would  not  adjust  his  methods  to  their  ideas,  they  were  too  self- 
conceited  to  conform  their  views  to  his. 

43.  Jesus  therefore  ans^yered  and  said  unto  them,  Mur- 
mur not  among  youi'selves. 

44.  No  man  can  come  to  me,  except  the  Father  which 
hath  sent  me  draw  him :  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last 
day. 

45.  It  is  written  in  the  prophets.  And  they  shall  be  all 
taught  of  God.  Every  man  therefore  that  hath  heard,  and 
hath  learned  of  the  Father,  cometh  unto  me. 

*Tlie  use  in  v.  39  of  tlie  neuter  ("  it"  and  also  "all  "  in  the  Greek) 
is  noticeable — apparently  designed  to  indicate  the  entire  body — the 
mass  as  a  whole. 

The  best  manuscripts  differ  from  our  received  text  (vs.  39,  40)  in 
placing  the  word  "Father"  not  in  v.  39,  but  in  v.  40;  thus:  In  v. 
39,  "This  is  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me ;  "  but,  v.  40;  "This  is  the 
will  of  my  Father."  The  difference  has  no  bearing  on  the  meaning 
of  the  verses.  The  same  may  be  said  of  an  immense  number  of  the 
various  readings  of  the  New  Testament  text. 


114  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VI. 

46.  Not  that  any  man  hath  seen  the  Father,  save  he 
which  is  of  God,  he  hath  seen  the  Father. 

In  tones  of  blended  tenderness  and  decision,  we  may  suppose 
Jesus  besought  them  not  to  give  place  to  murmurs  among  them- 
selves.  The  declaration,  "  No  man  can  come  to  me  except  the 

Father  who  hath  sent  me  draw  him,"  gives  the  negative  side,  cor- 
responding to  the  positive  as  put  in  v.  37.  There  he  had  said. 
All  who  are  so  given  shall  come;  here,  None  can  come  except 
those  who  are  drawn  by  the  Father.  In  the  last  clause  of  v.  45, 
the  same  point  made  in  v.  37  is  put  again,  adjusted  in  phrase  to 
the  context :  All  who  have  heard  and  learned  of  the  Father  come 
to  me. The  points  of  chief  practical  importance  here  lie  un- 
der the  question — la  this  inability  (^^^  can  not  come")  moral  or 
physical — that  of  the  will,  or  that  of  proper  incapacity,  want  of 
power?  So  also  secondly:  Is  this  "drawing"  of  the  sort  which 
moves  matter,  or  of  the  sort  which  moves  free,  intelligent  minds  ? 
Does  it  act,  like  creative  power,  to  produce  faculties  ;  or,  like  per- 
suasive power,  to  induce  the  desired  moral  activity  ?  The  distinc- 
tion is  a  broad  one,  easily  apprehended  and  exceedingly  important 
to  be  understood. 

As  bearing  on  the  naivre  of  this  inability,  whether  moral  or 

physical,  I  suggest: (a)  That  if  physical,  it  could  involve  no 

blame  for  not  coming.  Physical  incapacity  to  walk  exempts  from 
all  blame  for  not  walking.  One  so  intelligent  as  Jesus,  and  withal 
so  f;ir  from  making  unreasonable  requisitions,  could  never  have 
blamed  the  Jews  for  not  coming  to  him  if  really  they  had  no 

ability — no  capacity  to  come. {b)  The  thing  they  needed  was 

to  be  drmcn  of  God.  But  the  very  idea  of  drawing  implies  that 
they  had  the  power  and  lacked  only  the  inducement,  the  persuasion 
— which  is  equivalent  to  saying  that  they  were  entirely  able  if  only 
they  had  chosen  to  do  so. (c)  Yet  more  conclusive  is  the  expla- 
nation of  this  drawing  which  Jesus  himself  subjoins,  viz.,  that  it 
consists  in  being  "  taught  of  God."  So  v.  45  shows  decisively. 
l>ut  being  taught  applies  only  to  intelligent  mind;  not  here  to  un- 
intelligent matter.  It  contemplates  moral  action  under  the  power 
of  truth,  and  not  any  change  wrought  by  creative  energy  or  by 
force  applied  to  matter.  If  a  man  can  not  come  without  being 
drawn,  and  the  drawing  consists  in  being  taught  of  God,  we  come 
to  the  root  of  the  difficulty  when  we  raise  the  question —  W/12/  can 
not  men  be  "  taught  of  God"  ?  Why  do  they  not  receive  his  in- 
struction, and  why  do  they  not  obey  it?  Plainly,  not  for  want 
of  mental  capacity ;  not  because  of  idiocy ;  not  by  reason  of  any 
can  not  which  takes  away  blameworthiness  ;  not  for  any  incapac- 
ity which  lies  beyond  the  range  of  their  voluntary  control.  "  Ye 
tcill  not  come  to  me  that  ye  may  have  life,"  tells  the  simple  and 
the  whole  truth  in  the  case. 

V.  46  seems  designed  to  guard  the  Jews  against  supposing  that 
the  "being  taught  of  God  "  of  which  he  spake  (quoting  from  Isa. 
54:  13)  implied  seeing  him.     No  one  had  seen  the  Father  save 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  YI.  115 

the  Son  who  came  down  from  heaven — a  state  in  whicli  he  was 
near  God.* 

47.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  lie  that  believe tli  on 
me  hatli  everlasting  life. 

48.  I  am  that  bread  of  life. 

49.  Your  fathers  did  eat  manna  in  the  wilderness,  and 
are  dead. 

50.  This  is  the  bread  which  cometh  down  from  heaven, 
that  a  man  may  eat  thereof,  and  not  die. 

In  the  usual  form  of  solemn  emphasis  with  which  Jesus  is 
wont  to  propound  new  and  momentous  truths,  he  declares — "  He 

that  believeth  hath  everlastino;  life:  I  am  that  bread  of  life." 

There  is  more  force  (he  would  say  to  those  Jews)  in  your  own  al- 
lusion to  the  manna  than  yourselves  altoorether  apprehended. 
Your  fathers  did  indeed  eat  manna  in  the  wilderness,  and  died — 
died,  alas  !  but  too  soon  ;  died,  many  at  least  of  them,  before  their 
time.  But  all  unlike  that  manna-bread  is  this  which  came  from 
the  real  heaven,  of  which  it  will  be  universally  and  forever  true 
that  whoever  eats  of  it  shall  not  die. 

51 .  I  am  the  living  bread  which  came  down  from  heaven  : 
if  any  man  eat  of  this  bread,  he  shall  live  for  ever :  and  the 
bread  that  I  Avill  give  is  my  flesh,  which  I  will  give  for  the 
life  of  the  Avorld. 

"I  am  the  livinji;"  (in  the  sense  of  life-giving)  "bread."     The 

whole  course  of  thought  demands  the  sense  life-giving . The 

better  text  in  the  middle  clause  is — not  '' iMs  bread;"  but  my 

bread. In  the  last  clause  we  have  yet  another  advance  in  the 

figure.  Having  said  repeatedly — "I  am  the  bread  of  life,"  he 
here  advances  to  the  more  definite  statement — "  The  bread  that 
I  will  give  is  my  fiesh,  which  I  will  give  for  the  life  of  the  world." 
The  true  and  full  significance  of  these  words  should  be  carefully 
studied.     They  are  reiterated  and  somewhat  explained  below. 

52.  The  Jews  therefore  strove  among  themselves,  saying, 
How  can  this  man  give  us  his  flesh  to  eat  ? 

53.  Then  Jesus  said  unto  them.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto 
you,  Except  ye  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  man,  and  drink 
his  blood,  ye  have  no  life  in  you. 

54.  AVhoso  eateth  my  flesh,  and  drinketh  my  blood,  hath 
eternal  life ;  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day. 

55.  For  my  flesh  is  meat  indeed,  and  my  blood  is  drink 
indeed. 

*  Greek,  -rzapa  tov  Oeov.  The  more  approved  reading  makes  the  last 
clause — "  he  hath  seen  God." 


IIG  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VI. 

56.  He  that  eateth  my  flesli,  and  driuketh  my  blood, 
dwelletli  in  me,  and  I  in  him. 

57.  As  the  living  Father  hath  sent  me,  and  I  live  by  the 
Father ;  so  he  that  eateth  me,  even  he  shall  live  by  me. 

58.  This  is  that  bread  which  came  down  from  heaven  : 
not  as  your  fathers  did  eat  manna,  and  tire  dead :  he  that 
eateth  of  this  bread  shall  live  for  ever. 

59.  These  things  said  he  in  the  synagogue,  as  he  taught 
in  Capernaum. 

This  advanced  doctrine  sprung  a  fresh  debate  among  the  Jews  ; 
they  could  not  understand  how  this  man  could  "  give  them  his 

flesh  to  eat." Jesus  replies — not  retracting  a  word  he  had  said; 

not  toning  down  his  strong  language,  but  reaffirming  and  expand- 
ing with  some  explanatory  statements:  Ye  must  absolutely  eat 
the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  man,  and  drink  his  blood,  or  ye  can  have 
no  life  in  you.  Every  man  who  thus  eats  and  drinks  ffas  eternal 
life,  and  1  -will  raise  him  up,  saved,  at  the  last  day — every  such 
man,  and  no  other.  For  my  flesh  is  real  food  for  human  souls — 
the  food  that  restores  and  gives  enduring  life  to  souls  dead  in  sin. 
Then  vs.  56,  57,  add  somewhat  in  the  nature  of  explanation. 
"  Dwelling  in  me  and  T  in  him  "  involves  and  expresses  the  most 
intimate  relationship — a  perfect  communion  and  fellowship.  Let 
it  be  also  carefully  noted  that  these  words  must  rule  out  the 
whole  realm  of  viatter — must  exclude  all  reference  to  flesh  and 
body  in  the  material  sense  as  to  be  eaten  literally.  For  if  "I  in 
him  "  means  that  the  flesh  of  Jesus  passes  by  being  eaten  and  di- 
gested, into  the  flesh,  the  real  body  of  his  people;  then,  on  the 
other  hand,  "  dwelling  in  me  "  must  also  mean  that  the  flesh  of 
the  believer  goes  in  like  manner  into  the  material  body  of  Christ. 

Why  not? We  are  therefore  driven  from  the  material  to  the 

spiritual  sense  of  this  figure. To  the  same  construction  we  are 

brought  also  by  v.  57,  which  gives  the  analogy  between  Christ's 
relation  to  his  Father,  and  the  relation  of  his  people  to  himself. 

"  As  T  live  "  (said  Jesus)  "  by  the  Fathei',"  drawing  my  life  from 
the  Father — so  "  he  that  eateth  me  shall  live  by  me."  But  the  life 
which  Jesus  draws  from  the  Father  can  not  for  a  moment  be 
thought  of  as  in  any  sort  the  product  of  material  bread — is  not 
the  sort  of  life  in  which  our  bodies  are  sustained  by  digesting 

bread. Let  it  also  be  noted   that  Jesus  subsequently  affirms 

this  construction  (v.  63)  in  the  words: — "It  is  the  Spirit  that 
quickeneth  "  (giveth  life) ;  "  the  flesh  profiteth  nothing."  I  have 
never  meant  to  say  that  the  flesh  of  my  body  giveth  life  to  those 
that  eat  it  in  the  same  sense  in  which  bread  sustains  life  in  hu- 
man bodies.  No ;  I  am  thinking  only  of  the  truth  I  teach,  the 
sense  of  the  words  I  speak — as  giving  life  to  human  souls. 

In  pressing  the  figure  of  himself  as  the  bread  of  life,  to  the  ex- 
tent of  eating  his  flesh  and  drinking  his  blood,  Jesus  must  (it 
would  seem)   have  had  reference  to  his  sacrificial  death  on  the 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VI.  117 

cross.  Ilis  own  institution — the  holy  supper — \Yarrants  this  con- 
struction of  his  words  in  this  chapter,  lie  meant  to  lead  the 
thought  of  his  disciples  forward  to  that  atoning  death,  and  to 
teach  them  that  his  power  to  give  spiritual  life  to  their  souls  came 
in  a  measure  through  his  laying  down  his  life  as  the  Lamb  of 
Sacrifice.     It  was  in  this  point  of  view  that  his  blood  as  well  as 

his  flesh  enters  into  the  redemption  of  his  people. May  we 

not  also  assume  a  pushing  forward  of  the  analogy  of  digestion 
as  an  agency  for  the  material  life  of  the  body,  to  illustrate  the 
agency  whereby  Jesus  brings  spiritual  life  to  human  souls  ?  In 
this  spiritual  realm  his  flesh  and  blood  are  represented  (v.  63)  by 
"  the  words  I  speak  unto  you  which  are  spirit  and  life."  Words, 
inwardly  digested,  feed  the  soul,  as  bread  properly  digested,  feeds 
the  body.  The  spiritual  power  of  the  ordinance  of  the  supper  is 
altogether  of  the  same  sort — not  the  bread  eaten  feeding  the  body, 
but  the  truth  suggested  and  illustrated  feeding  the  soul. 

A  freshened  sense  of  the  importance  of  a  thorough  and  clear 
exposition  of  this  chapter  comes  over  me  as  I  read  the  comments 
of  such  a  critic  as  Dean  Alford.  He  maintains  strenuously  that 
these  words  of  Christ  can  not  take  effect— that  Christ  can  not  be- 
come the  bread  of  life  to  his  people,  so  that  the  sense  of  these 
words  shall  be  realized  in  Christian  experience  until  after  his 
resurrection,  because  it  is  Christ's  resurrection  body,  and  that  only 
which  his  people  eat.  These  are  Alford's  words  :  "  His  (Christ's) 
flesh  is  the  glorified  substance  of  his  resurrection  body,  now  at 
the  right  hand  of  God."  "It  is  then  in  his  resurrection  florm 
only  that  his  flesh  can  be  eaten  and  be  living  food  for  living 
men."  "It  is  only  through  or  after  the  death  of  the  Lord  that 
by  any  propriety  of  language  his  flesh  could  be  said  to  be  eaten." 

[The   italics   in  the  above  quotations  are  his.] Again:    "To 

eat  the  flesh  of  Christ  is  to  realize  in  our  inner  life  the  mystery 
of  his  body  noio  in  heaven — to  digest  and  assimilate  our  own  por- 
tion in  that  body." So  of  the  blood,     llis  view  as  to  both  the 

fl.esh  and  the  blood  of  Christ  he  brings  out  in  this  remarkable 
statement: — "  The  eating  of  his  flesh  and  drinking  of  his  blood 
import  the  making  to  ourselves  and  the  using,  as  objectively  real, 
those  two  great  truths  of  our  redemption  in  Him  of  which  our 
faith  subjectively  convinces  us." And  as  if  to  carry  his  mysti- 
cism to  its  perfection,  he  maintains  elaborately  that  the  world 
[kosmos]  is  to  have  life  through  Christ's  body,  and  says — "  The 
very  existence  of  all  the  created  world  is  owing  to  and  held  to- 
gether by  that  resurrection  body  of  the  Lord."  [But  was  not  the 
world  created  quite  a  while  before  the  resurrection  body  of  the 
Lord  came  into  being?] 

Now  let  the  reader  inquire  soberly,  What  can  be  the  meaning 
of  all  this?  Is  it  that  Christ's  resurrection  body  is  to  be  eaten 
as  men  eat  the  flesh  of  animals  for  dinner?  If  so,  when  and 
where?  Is  it  here  and  now?  or  only  after  we  have  our  resur- 
rection bodies?  If  here  and  now,  is  this  eating  a  fact  cognizant 
6 


118  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VI. 

to  our  senses,  or  even  to  our  consciousness?  When  Christ's  res- 
urrection body  is  eaten  and  digested  by  the  believer,  does  the 
portion  of  that  body,  so  eaten  and  digested,  cease  to  be  a  part  of 
Christ's  body,  and  become  a  constituent  portion  of  the  saint's 
body?  And  again — Is  this  eating  of  Christ's  resurrection  body 
an  essential  condition  of  salvation  ?     If  so,  how  were  the  ancient 

saints  saved  who  lived  and  died  before  Christ's  resurrection? 

Does  not  this  whole  system  of  Alford's  utterly  ignore  those  quali- 
fying, explanatory  words  of  Jesus — "  It  is  the  (Spirit  that  quick- 
eneth ;  the  flesh  profiteth  nothing.  The  words  that  I  speak  unto 
you,  they  are  spirit  and  they  are. life"  (v.  63)?  Does  it  not  also 
violate  and  render  nugatory  the  analogy  (put  in  v.  57)  between 
Christ's  living  by  the  Father  and  the  believer's  living  by  Christ? 
Is  it  not  absurd  and  revolting  to  our  common  sense  to  assume  a 
material  or  physical  eating  as  the  mode  by  which  Christ  derives 
life  from  the  Father? 

This  entire  scheme  of  interpretation  put  forward  by  Dean  Al- 
ford,  I  must  regard  as  mystical  in  the  bad  and  dangerous  sense, 
as  entirely  misleading,  and  as  exclusive  of  the  true  and  whole- 
some sense  of  Christ's  words. 

Far  more  simple,  more  sensible,  more  scriptural  in  every  bear- 
ing, is  this  construction  (as  above  given),  viz :  That  the  bread, 
miraculously  multiplied  for  five  thousand  men,  suggested  to  the 
Jews  the  manna  of  the  desert.  Following  out  this  suggestion 
Jesus  said — That  bread  was  not  from  the  real  heaven ;  it  did  not 
impart  enduring  life;  those  who  ate  ;.•:  died  fearfully  soon.  I 
give  you  the  real  bread  from  heaven.  1  am  the  bread  of  life. 
Receiving  me  by  faith  ye  live  forever.  And  lo  make  the  analogy 
more  forcible  he  pushes  it  yet  further ; — Mj  flesh  1  <Tive  for  the  life 
of  the  world.  Men  must  eat  my  flesh  and  drink  i::y  blood  to 
gain  eternal  life — said  with  aft  eye  to  his  sacrificial  death  as  pro- 
viding the  means  and  agencies  for  the  life  of  man.  Dying  he 
made  atonement  for  sin,  and  thus  made  pardon  possible  and  sal- 
vation sure  to  all  who  believe.  His  death,  moreover,  evolved  ^he 
great  moral  forces  which  reach  men's  hearts  and  subdue  them  lo 

penitence,   gratitude,  and  love. The   bread  and  wine   of  the 

supper  set   forth  in   symbol    the   precise   significance   of  these 

verses. This  construction  of  "eating  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of 

man"  is  sustained  against  all  other  constructions,  and  especially 
against  the  mystical  one  of  Alford,  by  the  explanations  and  an- 
alogies supplied  by  Jesus  himself,  as  in  vs.  56,  57,  63.  No  rule 
of  interpretation  is  more  reasonable  or  more  imperative  than 
this — that  Jesus  should  be  allowed  to  interpret  Iws  own  words; 
and  that  we  are  bound  to  take  his  interpretation. 

GO.  Many  therefore  of  his  disciples,  when  they  had  heard 
tliis,  said,  This  is  a  hard  saying;  who  can  hear  it? 

61.  When  Jesus  knew  in  himself  that  his  disciples  mur- 
mured at  it,  he  said  unto  them,  Doth  this  offend  you  ? 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VI.  119 

62.  What  and  if  ye  sliall  see  the  Son  of  man  ascend  up 
■where  he  ^vas  before? 

63.  It  is  the  Spirit  that  quickeneth;  the  flesh  profiteth 
nothing:  the  words  that  I  sj^eak  unto  you,  tJiey  are  spirit, 
and  they  are  life. 

Some  who  had  previously  been  regarded  as  his  disciples  stum- 
bled at  these  teachings  and  murmured.  "This,"  said  they,  "is  a 
hai-d  saying" — hard  in  the  sense  of  repulsive,  unacceptable,  such 

as  we  can  not  receive. What  was  precisely  the  point  upon  which 

they  stumbled?  Was  it  that  he  said — "No  man  can  come  to  me 
except  the  Father  draw  him"  ?  There  is  nothing  in  this  chapter 
which  indicates  offense  at  this. AVas  it  what  he  said  of  "  eat- 
ing his  flesh"  ?  This  was  one  of  the  hard  sayings  over  which  the 
Jews  strove  among  themselves,  as  appears  v.  52.  And  this  seems 
to  have  been  the  head  and  front  of  the  offense.  It  involved  a 
Messiah  suffering  and  dying — not  as  they  construed  it,  conquer- 
ing, reigning ;  and  therefore  it  ran  counter  to  all  their  cherished 
notions  of  their  nation's  Deliverer.  His  work  as  thus  set  forth 
made  no  account  of  the  worldly  greatness  they  aspired  to,  but 
utmost  account  of  that  sj^iritual  life,  in  purity  and  love,  for  which 
they  had  no  aspirations.  Hence  they  said  in  their  hearts — We 
are  disappointed  in  this  man;  he  meets  none  of  our  cherished 
hopes;  why  should  Ave  follow  him  longer?  Jesus  said  (v.  64) 
that  they  "believed  not"^i.  e.  did  not  accept  him  as  the  prom- 
ised Messiah. 

In  V.  62  the  Greek,  literally  translated,  would  read — "If  then 
ye  should  see  the  Son  of  man  ascend  Avhere  he  was  before" — 
leaving  the  real  question.  What  then?  to  be  supplied.  The 
bearing  of  this  is  plain.  The  visible  ascension  of  Jesus  to  the 
Father  was  ere  long  to  take  place ;  some  human  eyes  would  see 
it :  What  would  ye  "think  of  it  if  it  should  transpire  before  your 
very  eyes  ?  This  future  fact  would  carry  with  it  a  certain  power 
of  demonstration.  Our  Lord  fitly  refers  to  it  in  this  way  as  one 
of  the  proofs  yet  to  be  revealed  of  his  real  Messiahship. 

Suddenly  dropping  that  point,  he  seeks  (v.  63)  to  remove  the 
offense  from  before  them  by  turning  their  minds  from  their  gross 
literalism  to  the  just  view  of  what  he  had  said  as  to  eating  his 
flesh.  It  is  only  the  spirit — not  at  all  the  flesh — which  gives  men 
real  life,  and  by  which  I  become  to  men  "the  bread  of  life."  It 
is  in  the  words  I  speak — not  in  the  literal  flesh  supposably  eaten 
by  human  teeth — that  this  power  of  life  for  men  resides. 

It  deserves  remark  here  that  this  figure  of  "eating"  (as  ap- 
plied to  Christ's  flesh)  was  far  more  in  harmony  with  Jewish 
than  with  modern  ideas  and  usage,  and  therefore  more  readily 
intelligible  to  them  than  to  us.  They  could  say  (as  in  Jer.  15 : 
16)  "  Thy  Avords  Avere  found,  and  I  did  eat  them  :"  or  (Ezek.  3:1) 
"Son  of  man,  eat  that  thou  findest;  eat  this  roll;"  also  (Isa.  55: 
1)  "Come  A-e,  buy  and  eat;  yea  come,  buy  Avine  and  milk  Avith- 


120  GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CILiP.  VI. 

out  money  and  without  price."  "  The  wicked  eat  the  fruit  of 
their  own  way,"  etc. 

64.  But  there  are  some  of  you  that  believe  not.  For  Je- 
sus knew  from  the  beginning  who  they  were  that  believed 
not,  and  who  should  betray  him. 

65.  And  he  said,  Therefore  said  I  unto  you,  that  no  man 
can  come  unto  me,  except  it  were  given  unto  him  of  my 
Father. 

Jesus  saw  in  their  heart  the  root  of  all  this  trouble — the  true 
occasion  of  this  sad  stumbling.  There  were  some  among  his  pro- 
fessed disciples  who  did  not  heartily  believe  on  him.  Some,  we 
know  not  how  many,  seem  to  have  followed  him  up  to  this  hour, 
but  left  him  here.  It  was  with  an  eye  to  their  case  that  Jesus  bad 
said  (as  above) — "No  man  can  come  to  me  except  it  were  given 
unto  him  of  my  Father."  These  apostates  had  not  been  "taught 
of  God  ;  "  they  had  never  sought — had  never  accepted  the  teach- 
ing that  comes  from  God  through  the  Spirit.  Their  supposed 
conversion  had  been  tvitJiout  God,  no  hand  of  God  being  in  it. 
Their  motive  and  spirit  had  been  wholly  of  the  earth,  earthy. 

66.  From  that  time  many  of  his  disciples  went  back,  and 
walked  no  more  with  him. 

67.  Then  said  Jesus  unto  the  twelve,  Will  ye  also  go 
away? 

68.  Then  Simon  Peter  answered  him,  Lord,  to  Avhom  shall 
we  go?  thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life. 

69.  And  we  believe  and  are  sure  that  thou  art  that 
Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God. 

Was  it  because  so  many  turned  back  at  this  point  that  Jesus 
said — as  if  feeling  almost  utterly  forsaken — "Will  ye  also  go 
away?"  Or  was  it  rather  to  draw  out  from  them  this  grateful  tes- 
timony to  their  fidelity  ? Be  this  as  it  may,  Simon  Peter  is 

always  prompt  and  ready.  Go  away  from  Thee  ?  Go  where  ?  To 
whom  else  could  we  go,  or  should  we?  "Thou  hast  the  words 
of  eternal  life."  There  can  be  no  higher  Teacher — none  better. 
Thy  words  are  unto  life  eternal.    We  accept— we  love  them.    We 

want  no  other. Moreover,  "we  know  thee." Peter's  words 

according  to  the  best  text  were — "We  have  believed  and  have 
known  that  Thou  art  the  Holy  One  of  God."  The  reading  in  our 
English  Bible  is  supposed  to  have  come  from  Matt.  16:  16 — the 
transcriber  assuming  that  Peter  must  have  used  the  same  expres- 
sion here  as  there. The  coincidence  of  this  language  with  that 

of  the  demoniac  as  in  Mark  1 :  24  and  Luke  4:  34  is  remarkable. 
The  Sinaitic  and  Vatican,  manuscripts  concur  in  this  read- 
ing— "the  Holy  One  of  God" — beautifully  brief  and  expressive. 

70.  Jesus  answered  them,  Have  not  I  chosen  you  twelve, 
and  one  of  you  is  a  devil  ? 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VII.  121 

71.  He  spake  of  Judas  Iscariot  the  son  of  Simon:  for  he 
it  was  that  should  betray  him,  being  one  of  the  t\Yelve. 

Even  of  you,  "  one  is  a  devil" — said  of  Judas  Iscariot,  the  traitor 
whose  heai't  was  bare  before  the  eye  of  Jesus.  "A  devil,"  in  the 
sense  of  being  a  ready  instrument  for  Satan's  woi'k;  temptible,  and 
sure  when  the' occasion  came,  to  fall  before  Satan's  temptation  and 
betray  his  master. 

If  the  question  be  raised —  WInj  did  Jesus  choose  one  Judas  into 
the  number  of  the  twelve  ?  we  may  not  sec  all  the  reasons,  yet  we 
may  perhaps  conjecture  some  of  them.  "We  may  at  least  suggest 
that  the  testimony  of  this  traitor — "I  have  betrayed  innocent 
blood" — served  to  supplement  and  fill  out  to  perfection  the  proof 
that  Jesus  was  honest  and  sincere.  Judas  had  been  with  him  in 
his  daily  life,  present  in  his  consultations ;  conversant  witli  his 
most  secret  plans,  so  that  if  there  had  been  another  side  to  his 
character — an  inner  side  known  only  to  his  chosen  associates — 
here  Avas  the  man  to  divulge  it — a  man  who  had  not  merely  the 
ability  but  every  inducement,  in  order  to  justify  his  treason  to 
himself  and  to  mankind.  In  the  hour  of  crisis  not  a  word  had  he 
to  say  in  self-justification — not  a  word  of  testimony  against  Jesus 
to  give  the  court  and  the  prosecution  who  were  seeking  testimony 
with  untiring  zeal;  but  on  the  contrary,  stung  with  remorse,  he 
cried,  "  I  have  sinned  in  that  1  have  betrayed  the  innocent 
blood!" 

Moreover  inasmuch  as  very  many,  not  to  say  most  of  the  local 
churches  of  Christ  will  have  one  or  more  members  of  the  charac- 
ter of  Judas,  there  may  lie  in  this  fact  a  reason  why  Jesus  should 
submit  to  the  trials  of  such  a  condition,  that  his  people  through 
all  time  might  see  that  he  was  tempted  in  all  points  as  we  are,  and 
knows  how  to  sympathize  with  and  succor  his  people  in  ever}'' 
need. 


CHAPTER   VII. 

The  conversations  and  scenes  of  this  chapter  occurred  in  the 
temple  in  Jerusalem  at  the  feast  of  tabernacles.  First  is  the  dis- 
cussion between  himself  and  his  lineal  brethren  as  to  his  going 
up  to  the  feast  (vs.  1-10) ;  then  the  general  inquiry  among  the 
Jews  as  to  his  character  and  claims  (vs.  10-13);  his  teachings  in 
the  temple  and  the  discussion  which  followed  (vs.  14-20) ;  renewed 
discussion  over  the  healing  of  the  impotent  man  at  Bethesda 
(vs.  21-24):  persecution  excited  afresh  by  the  men  of  Jerusalem 
(vs.  25-31) :  officers  are  deputed  to  arrest  him  and  the  ensuing  con- 
versation (vs.  32-36) ;  the  public  announcement  by  Jesus  on  the 
great  day  of  the  feast  and  the  diverse  opinions  among  the  people 


122  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VII. 

(vs.  37-44);  the  officers  failing  to  arrest  him  make  their  official 
returns  and  a  fierce  debate  ensues  (vs.  45-52). 

1.  After  these  things  Jesus  ■walked  in  Galilee:  for  he 
would  not  -walk  in  Jewry,  becau.=e  the  Jews  sought  to  kill 
him. 

2.  Now  the  Jews'  feast  of  tabernacles  was  at  hand. 

3.  His  brethren  therefore  said  unto  him,  Depart  hence, 
and  go  into  Judea,  that  thy  disciples  also  may  see  the  works 
that  thou  doest. 

4.  For  there  is  no  man  that  doeth  any  thing  in  secret,  and 
he  himself  seeketh  to  be  known  oj)enly.  If  thou  do  these 
things,  shew  thyself  to  the  world. 

5.  For  neither  did  his  brethren  believe  in  him. 

"Walked" — traversing  the  country  from  place  to  place  as  the 

Greek    -word    implies,    jDreaching    and    healing. "Jewry" — 

another  name  for  Judea  which  is  the  Greek  -word  here.  No  rea- 
son appears  for  using  this  word  rather  than  Judea  unless  it  be 

to  indicate  it  as  the    special   residence  of  Jews. Jesus  knew 

that  the  Jews  were  incensed  against  him,  plotting  his  death;  and 
shaped  his  movements  accordingly,-* At  this  point  in  his  min- 
istry his  lineal  brethren  had  not  believed  in  him  as  the  nation's 
Messiah.  They  professed  not  to  understand  why  he  should  be  so 
retiring  and  so  averse  to  publicity.  "Go  up,"  said  they,  to  Jeru- 
salem ;  perform  miracles  in  the  presence  of  the  people  who  are 
willing  to  hear  thy  instructions ;  for  surely,  one  who  claims  to  be 
the  nation's  Messiah,  and  whose  business  therefore  it  should  be  to 

make  himself  known,  ought  not  to  work  only  in  secret. They 

seem  to  imply  that  this  policy  must  disparage  his  claims.  The 
historian  (v.  5)  accounts  for  their  words  by  saying  that  as  yet 
they  did  not  believe  on  him. 

6.  Then  Jesus  said  unto  them.  My  time  is  not  yet  come : 
but  your  time  is  always  ready. 

7.  The  world  can  not  hate  you  ;  but  me  it  hateth,  because 
I  testify  of  it,  that  the  works  thereof  are  evil. 

8.  Go  ye  up  unto  this  feast :  I  go  not  up  yet  unto  this  feast ; 
for  my  time  is  not  yet  full  come, 

9.  When  he  had  said  these  words  unto  them,  he  abode 
still  in  Galilee. 

10.  But  Avhen  his  brethren  were  gone  up,  then  went  he 
also  up  unto  the  feast,  not  openly,  but  as  it  were  in  secret. 

My  time  for  the  publicity  you  insist  upon  is  not  yet;  I  know  my 
work  and  its  obstacles ;  I  understand  what  wisdom  and  prudence 
demand.  Ye  have  no  occasion  for  such  caution;  ye  have  never 
incurred  the  hatred  of  bad  men  by  faithfully  rebuking  their  sins. 

At  first  view  it  may  appear  to  some  readers  that  Jesus  fell  short 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  Yll.  123 

of  entire  frankness,  not  to  say  truth  Avith  these  brethren  in. first 
saying — "I  go  not  up  to  this  feast;"  and  afterwards  in  going. 
Must  this  be  regarded  as  duplicity  ? — On  this  point  let  it  be  noted  : 
— (a.)  Jesus  did  not  say,  I  am  not  going  at  all ;  but  I  am  not  going 
note — using  the  present  tense.    He  left  it  an  open  question  whether 

he  should  go  at  some  later  time  if  it  should  seem  to  him  best. 

(6.)  It  is  supposable  that  his  eye  was  specially  upon  the  public 
manner  of  going  up  which  his  brethren  advised ;  and  that  therefore 
he  meant  to  say — I  can  not  go  in  the  way  ye  recommend  and 
demand.     ]f  1  go  it  must  be  in  a  much  more  private  way — as  the 

historian  is  careful  to  say  (v.  10)  that  he  actually  went. (c.) 

May  it  not  be  said  that  a  remarkable  consciousness  of  integrity  is 
manifest  both  in  the  words  of  Jesus  and  in  the  fidelity  of  the  his- 
torian— in  that  the  statements  are  so  unguarded,  as  if  there  were 
no  fear  or  thought  that  any  one  would  suspect  duplicity.  There 
is  no  studied  attempt  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  it. 

11.  Then  the  Jev,'s  sought  liirn  at  the  feast,  and  said, 
Where  is  he? 

12.  And  there  was  much  murmuring  among  the  people 
concerning  him :  for  some'  said.  He  is  a  good  man :  others 
said.  Nay ;  but  he  deceiveth  the  people. 

13.  Howbeit  no  man  spake  openly  of  liim  for  fear  of  the 
Jews. 

The  public  mind  was  profoundly  moved  with  the  question  of 

the  claims  of  Jesus. This  "murmuring"  was  not  in  the  sense 

of  complaining,  fault-finding;  but  rather  of  whispering,  talking  in 
an  under-tone.  It  contemplates  the  talk  as  heard  by  a  listener — 
a  buzzing  sound.  Those  men  feared  to  speak  openly  lest  they 
should  incur  the  suspicion  or  the  wrath  of  the  Jewish  leaders — ■ 
already  furious  against  Jesus. The  "Jews"  in  such  a  connec- 
tion are  the  members  of  their  Great  Council  with   the  leading 

Scribes    and  Pharisees   in  their  sympathy. Noticeably,   the 

primary  and  pivotal  question  was  that  of  moral  character — Is  he 
a  good  man ;  or  is  he  a  deceiver  of  the  people?  For  if  Jesus  were 
a  thoroughly  good  man  with  none  but  honest  intentions,  he  must 
be  the  long  promised  Messiah ;  since  it  was  not  even  supposable 
that  he  was  himself  mistaken  as  to  his  being  sent  of  God,  taught 
of  God,  and  indorsed  of  God  by  receiving  from  him  the  miracle- 
working  power. 

14.  Now  about  the  midst  of  the  feast  Jesus  weiat  up  into 
the  temple  and  taught. 

15.  And  the  Jews  marveled,  saying.  How  knoweth  this 
man  letters,  having  never  learned? 

16.  Jesus  ansAvered  them,  and  said.  My  doctrine  is  not 
mine,  but  his  that  sent  me. 

17.  If  any  man  will  do  his  will,  he  shall  know  of  the  doc- 
trine, Avhether  it  be  of  God,  or  ivhether  I  speak  of  myself. 


12-4  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VII, 

18.  He  that  speaketli  of  himself  seeketh  his  own  glory : 
but  he  that  seeketh  his  glory  that  sent  him,  the  same  is  true, 
and  no  unrighteousness  is  in  him. 

This  feast  was  held  eight  days,  half  of  -which  had  past  before 
Jesus  appeared  in  the  temple.  His  time  had  come  for  a  more 
open  manifestation  of  himself  and  of  his  claims. — "  The  Jews  " — 
the  same  parties  as  above  (v.  13)  marveled  at  his  knowledge  of 
their  scriptures,  for  they  knew  he  had  not  been  trained  in  their 
schools — had  never  sat  at  the  feet  of  their  Gamaliels.  They  could 
not  comprehend  how  one  could  get  so  much  knowledge  of  this 

sort  anywhere  else. It  is  highly  probable  that  this  discourse 

was  mainly  an  exposition  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  especi- 
ally of  the  prophecies  concerning  the  Messiah  like  that  in  the  syna- 
gogue at  Nazareth  (Luke  4  :  16-22).  For  the  time  had  then  come 
for  such  a  discourse  in  the  temple,  and  this  supposition  well  accounts 
fur  their  expressed  surprise  at  his  knowledge  of  their  books — 

["grammata"]. Jesus  replies;  What  I  teach   is  not  original 

with  me  but  comes  from  him  who  sent  me.  These  prophecies 
which  I  have  been  expounding  are  God's  own  Avords ;  all  I  teach 
comes  from  him.  This  answers  your  question — How  knowctli 
this  man  the  things  of  our  Scriptures  ? 

"  If  a  man  will  do  his  will "  (as  given  in  our  English)  is  too  tame 
and  Aveak.  The  word  "  will"  in  the  phrase  "  will  do"  is  not  a  future 
tense  but  a  verb — full  of  force;  if  one  has  a  ivill  to  do  God's  pleas- 
ure, if  he  sets  his  heart  upon  it  and  solemnly  purposes  to  do  all 
God's  known  will  and  nothing  else  or  other,  then  God  will  teach 
him  concerning  me  and  my  doctrine  Avhether  it  be  from  God,  or 
whether  I  speak  out  of  my  OAvn  heart  only,  with  no  message  from 
God.  This  is  the  old  doctrine ; — "  The  meek  will  he  guide  in  judg- 
ment; the  meek  will  he  teach  his  way"  (Ps.  25:  9).  The  docile 
and  obedient  God  loves  to  lead  on  into  all  truth.  He  sends  his 
Spirit  on  this  very  mission,  to  do  this  A'cry  work. This  princi- 
ple gives  the  great  secret  of  leai-ning  the  truth  of  God.  It  shows 
Avhat  attitude  of  mind  and  state  of  heart  toward  God  will  insure 
his  divine  guidance,  and  consequently,  lead  into  all  vitally  impor- 
tant truth. In  the  phrase  (v.  17,  18)  "  speaketh  of  himself" — 

"  of"  is  not  in  the  sense  of  concerning  but  rather — out  of — out  of 
his  own  heart  as  oi:)posed  to  speaking  what  is  given  him  by  and 
from  God.  If  Jesus  had  spoken  so  it  Avould  have  been  seeking  his 
own  glory,  Avhereas  in  fact  he  sought  only  the  glory  of  God  who 
sent  him  and  thus  proved  himself  Sijrue  man  and  no  impostor. 

19.  Did  not  Moses  give  you  the  law,  and  yet  none  of  you 
keepeth  the  laAV?     Why  go  ye  about  to  kill  me? 

20.  The  people  ansAvered  and  said,  Thou  hast  a  devil:  Avho 
goeth  about  to  kill  thee? 

Christ's  appeal  in  this  way  to  Moses  and  the  law  was  specially 
pertinent  to  them  because  they  gloried  in  being  his  professed  fol- 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VII.  125 

Jowers — above  all  other  students  or  teachers  of  his  law.  But  Jesus 
puts  it  to  their  conscience — "None  of  you  keepeth  the  law" — for 
that  law  describes  myself  as  the  great  prophet  to  be  sent  of  God ; 

yet  yc  not  only  reject  me  but  seek  my  life. The  people  answer — 

"Thou  hast  a  devil."  They  did  not  say  diabolos,  as  is  said  of  Judas 
(G :  70),  but  "daimonion" — a  demon  spirit,  which  they  meant  to 
say  possessed  him — perhaps  in  their  view  the  real  author  of  tlte 
words  he  spoke  and  of  the  deeds  he  wrought.  Could  the  infatua- 
tion of  moral  blindness  farther  go? "Who  goeth  about  to  kill 

thee  "  ?  as  if  they  were  supremely  innocent  of  any  such  purpose 
and  had  never  heard  even  a  whisper  thereof!  Apparently  they 
did  not  see  the  Avay  open  yet  to  strike  and  therefore  deliberately 
lied  to  keep  dark  for  yet  a  season  longer. 

21.  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  tlicm,  I  have  done  one 
work,  and  ye  all  marvel. 

22.  IMoses  therefore  gave  unto  you  circumcision ;  (not 
because  it  is  of  Moses,  but  of  the  fathers;)  and  ye  on  the 
sabbath  day  circumcise  a  man. 

23.  If  a  man  on  the  sabbath  day  receive  circumcision, 
that  the  law  of  IMoses  should  not  be  broken ;  are  ye  angry 
at  me,  because  I  have  made  a  man  every  Avhit  whole  on  the 
sabbath  day? 

24.  Judge  not  according  to  the  appearance,  but  judge  right- 
eous judgment. 

The  "one  work"  referred  to  was  the  healing  of  the  impotent 
man  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda,  which,  it  should  be  remembered, 
occurred  at  Jerusalem,  as  also  the  long  discourse  which  ensued 
(as  in  John  5).  Here  Jesus  resumes  that  discussion  with  a  fresh 
argument,  viz,  that  the  law  of  circumcision,  which  like  the  Sab- 
bath was  older  than  Moses,  required  the  infant  to  be  circumcised 
on  its  eighth  day,  and  this  was  done  even  though  the  day  was  the 
Sabbath.  Should  they  then  be  angry  at  him  for  making  a  man 
entirely  whole  on  the  Sabbath?  Was  the  sacredness  of  the  day 
more  violated  by  what  he  had  done  than  by  what  they  were 
often  doing  in  the  act  of  circumcision  ?  Was  not  healing  a  poor 
cripple  as  good  a  work  and  as  needful  as  the  circumcision  of  a 
babe  eight  days  old?  "Judge  not"  (says  he)  upon  the  merely 
surface  view,  but  according  to  intrinsic  righteousness. 

25.  Then  said  some  of  them  of  Jerusalem,  Is  not  this  he, 
"whom  they  seek  to  kill  ? 

26.  But,  lo,  he  speaketh  boldly,  and  they  say  nothing  unto 
him.  Do  the  rulers  know  indeed  that  this  is  the  very 
Christ? 

"The  men  of  Jerusalem  "  lead  off,  more  virulent  against  Jesus 
than  any  others.  Living  at  the  central,  focal  point  of  Pharisaism, 
they  had  (as  they  felt  it)  more  and  deeper  interests  at  stake  than 


126  GOSPEL  OF  JOIIX.— CHAP.  VII. 

any  other  Jews. Ts  not  this  the  man,  said  they,  v/ho  has  been 

found  worthy  of  death  for  both  Sabbath  breaking  and  blasphemy  ? 
(John  5  :  IS).  Why  do  they  let  him  go  on  thus  in  bold  and  pub- 
lic speech  misleading  the  people  ?  Do  the  rulers  know  that  this 
is  the  very  Christ?  Of  course  this,  in  their  thought,  is  an  im- 
possible supposition,  put  only  for  effect.  It  amounts  to  a  chal- 
lenge to  those  rulers  to  repel  the  taunt  and  clear  themselves  of 
the  suspicion  of  being  disciples  of  the  supposed  Nazarene. 

27.  Howbcit  we  know  this  man  whence  he  is :  but  when 
Christ  conieth,  no  man  knoweth  whence  he  is. 

28.  Then  cried  Jesus  in  the  temple  as  he  taught,  saying, 
Ye  both  know  me,  and  ye  know  Avhence  I  am:  and  I  am 
not  come  of  myself,  but  he  that  sent  me  is  true,  Avhom  ye 
know  not. 

29.  But  I  know  him;  for  I  am  from  him,  and  he  liath 
sent  me. 

It  does  not  appear  on  what  ground  they  assumed  that  the  Mes- 
siah must  come  from  some  unknown  quarter.  In  fact  the  proph- 
ecy of  Micah  (5  :  2)  had  indicated  his  birth-place  very  definitely — 
Bethlehem.     Yet  it  is  not  certain  that  they  knew  of  his  birth 

there. In  saying — "  Ye  know  me  and   know  whence  I  am," 

Jesus,  no  doubt,  meant  to  rebut  their  argument  against  his  j\les- 
siahship — viz,  that  his  origin  was  unknown.  He  meant  to  say — 
Ye  know  enough  of  me  and  of  my  mission  from  God  to  demand 
your  belief  Your  skepticism  has  no  valid  foundation.  Your 
plea — We  do  not  know  his  credentials — is  folse  and  unavailing. 
Ye  know  I  have  not  come  of  my  own  motion.  Ye  know  I  am 
sent  of  God,  though  ye  are  far  from  knowing  God  in  the  deep 
spiritual  sense  in  which  I  know  him. 

30.  Then  they  sought  to  take  him  :  but  no  man  laid  hands 
on  him,  because  his  hour  Avas  not  yet  come. 

31.  And  many  of  the  people  believed  on  him,  and  said, 
AVhen  Christ  cometh,  will  he  do  more  miracles  than  these 
which  this  7nan  hath  done? 

Infuriated  by  such  plain  rebuke  and  such  exposure  of  their  fal- 
lacies, they  sought  to  seize  him.  Precisely  how  they  were  pre- 
vented is  not  apparent.  Perhaps  the  masses  were  not  ripe  for 
it  and  would  not  sustain  or  even  permit  his  violent  arrest.  This 
is  made  probable  by  the  remark  that  "many  of  the  people  then 
believed  on  him."  "NYith  much  good  sense  they  reasoned  that  the 
real  Messiah  should  not  be  expected  to  work  more  miracles  than 
this  man  had  wrought. 

32.  The  Pharisees  heard  that  the  people  murmured  such 
things  concerning  him;  and  the  Pharisees  and  the  chief 
priests  sent  officers  to  take  him. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VII.  127 

33.  Then  said  Jesus  unto  them,  Yet  a  little  while  am  I 
with  you,  and  then  I  go  unto  him  that  sent  me. 

34.  Ye  shall  seek  me,  and  shall  not  find  me:  and  where  I 
am,  thither  ye  cannot  come. 

35.  Then  said  the  Jews  among  themselves,  Whither  will 
he  go,  that  we  shall  not  find  him?  Avill  he  go  unto  the  dis- 
persed among  the  Gentiles,  and  teach  the  Gentiles  ? 

36.  "What  manner  of  saying  is  this  that  he  said,  Ye  shall 
seek  me,  and  shall  not  find  me:  and  where  I  am,  thither  ye 
cannot  come  ? 

The  Pharisees  heard  of  this  talking  in  undei'-tone  among  the 

Eeople,   and  forthwith   commissioned  a  band  of  officers  to  arrest 
im. The  manner  in  which  Jesus  met  them  is  characteristic. 

With  quietjet  solemn,  impressive  dignity;  unawed  by  their  au- 
thority; fearless  of  their  violence;  he  said — "I  have  a  little 
longer  yet  to  remain  among  you ;  all  your  threats  of  violence  and 
attempts  at  arrest  will  not  shorten  this  hour.  When  my  time 
comes,  I  shall  go  to  him  that  sent  me,  and  ye  will  seek  me  then 

in  vain." The  spirit  of  these  words  appears  again  in  what  Je- 

sua  said  to  Pilate  ;  "  Thou  couldest  have  no  power  at  all  against 
me  except  it  were  given  thee  from  above ;  therefore  he  that  de- 
livered me  unto  thee  hath  the  greater  sin  "  (John  19  :  II).  I  am 
under  the  care  of  Almighty  God ;  ye  can  do  nothing  more  or 
worse  than  his  wisdom  permits.     He  will  soon  take  me  safely  to 

himself;  your  wrath  against  me  will  be  utterly  futile. In  their 

speculations  as  to  the  sense  of  his  words,  they  scornfully  taunt 
him  with  perhaps  thinking  of  going  abroad  to  preach  to  Gentiles 
and  to  JcAvs  exiled  in  other  lands  among  despised  outsiders.  Yet 
they  could  not  quite  fathom  his  meaning  to  their  own  satisfaction. 
His  words  would  lie  heavy  and  hard  upon  their  souls.  Could 
it  be  that  this  man  was  really  as  safe  under  God's  care  as  he 
seemed  ? 

37.  In  the  last  day,  that  great  day  of  the  feast,  Jesus 
stood  and  cried,  saying.  If  any  man  thirst,  let  him  come 
unto  me,  and  drink. 

38.  He  that  believeth  on  me,  as  the  Scripture  hath  said, 
out  of  his  belly  shall  flow  rivers  of  living  water. 

39.  (But  this  spake  he  of  the  Spirit,  which  they  that  be- 
lieve on  him  should  receive  :  for  the  Holy  Ghost  was  not  yet 
given;  because  that  Jesus  was  not  yet  glorified.) 

It  is  generally  held  that  this  last  and  great  day  of  the  feast  was 
the  eighth,  and  that  this  proclamation  of  Jesus  may  have  been 
suggested  by  the  Jewish  custom  of  having  water  borne  on  that 
day  in  joyful  procession  from  the  pool  of  Siloam  and  poured  out  be- 
fore the  Lord.  Some,  however,  hold  that  the  water  was  not 
brought  in  at  this  time,  yet  that  even  this  failure  may  have  been 


128  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VII. 

suggestive — as  if  Jesus  would  say  to  the  expectant,  -waiting,  but 
disappointed  people — Look  rather  to  me !  If  any  man  thirst,  let 
him.  come  unto  me — not  go  to  the  waters  of  Siloam — and  in  me 
find  the  true  waters  of  life.  However  the  case  may  be  as  to  Jew- 
ish usage  on  this  last  great  day,  there  can  be  no  question  that  Je- 
sus had  his  eye  somewhat  upon  the  words  of  ancient  Scripture — - 
"  With  joy  shall  ye  draw  water  out  of  the  wells  of  salvation" 
(Isa.    12:    3);    "I  will  pour  water   on  him  that  is   thirsty   and 

floods  upon  the  dry  ground." "I  will  pour  my  Spirit 

upon  thy  seed  and  my  blessing  upon  thy  offspring  '  (Isa.  44:  o); 
"Ho,  every  one  that  thirsteth ;  come  ye  to  tlxe  waters"  (Isa.  55: 
1) — with  passages  of  kindred  import  in  Joel  and  Zechariah  (Joel 
2:   28,  29,  and  3 :   18;   Zech.  13:   1  and  14:   8). 

In  regard  to  the  specific  reference  in  v.  38 — "As  the  scripture 
hath  said  " — we  fail  to  find  precisely  these  words  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment scriptures.  Yet  taking  into  view  the  New  Testament  usage 
by  which  the  human  body  is  spoken  of  as  "the  temple  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,"  we  find  the  symbol  naturally  corresponding  to  the 
Savior's  words  in  Ezekiel  47:  1-12,  where  rivers  of  living  water 
flow  out  from  under  the  spiritual  figurative  temple.  As  this  pas- 
sage in  Ezekiel  beyond  a  doubt  looks  towai-d  the  effusions  of  the 
Spirit  in  the  gospel  age,  it  seems  to  meet  the  conditions  of  our 
Savior's  allusion — "  As  the  scripture  hath  said,  out  of  his  belly 
shall  flow  rivers  of  living  water."  The  historian  (John)  seems 
aware  that  these  words  of  Jesus  (vs.  37,  38)  might  be  obscure,  es- 
pecially to  his  contemplated  Gentile  readers — less  familiar  than 
Jews  with  the  Old  Testament  prophetic  scriptures  (as  above  quo- 
ted), and  therefore  subjoins  the  explanation  in  v.  39,  viz.  that  Je- 
sus referred  to  the  gift  of  the  Spirit,  then  shortly  to  be  shed  forth 
abundantly,  as  Isaiah,  Joel,  and  Zechariah  had  foretold.  He 
makes  it  a  special  point  that  this  gift  of  the  Spirit  in  its  extraor- 
dinary fullness  was  j^et  future  though  near;  "not  yet  given,  be- 
cause that  Jesus  was  not  yet  glorified."  The  scriptures  show 
clearly  that  this  being  "  glorified  "  involved  his  resurrection  from 
the  dead,  and  referred  specially  to  his  ascension  in  his  risen 
body,  and  his  public  exaltation  to  the  throne  of  heaven  in  equal 
honor  with  the  Father — "  high  above  all  principalities  and  powers 
in  the  heavenly  places"  (Eph.  1:  20,  21).  The  apostles  are  joy- 
fully emphatic  on  the  point  of  this  exaltation,  and  of  its  being 
followed  at  once  by  the  signal  outpouring  of  the  Spirit.  Earliest 
in  time  is  Peter's  testimony  on  the  day  of  Pentecost:  "This  Je- 
sus hath  God  raised  up  ;  "  "  Being  therefore  by  the  right  hand  of 
God  exalted,  and  having  received  of  the  Father  the  promise  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  he  hath  shed  forth  this  which  ye  now  see  and 
hear"  (Acts  2:  33).     Compare  also  Acts  5:  31. 

In  this  connection  let  us  recall  the  remarkably  full  instructions 
respecting  the  mission  and  work  of  "the  Spirit  of  truth" — the 
Comforter — which  Jesus  gave  his  disciples  on  the  evening  before 
his  arrest — as  in  John  14:  16-18,  and  15:  26,  and  16:  7-15.  In 
view  of  the  fullness  and  richness  of  these  words,  they  might  seem 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VII.  129 

almost  a  new  revelation. Luke  is  definite  on  the  point  that  Je- 
sus iu  repeating  the  promise  of  this  gift  from  the  Father  bade  his 
disciples  "  tarry  in  Jerusalem  till  they  were  endued  with  power 
from  on  high"  (Luke  24:  49,  and  Acts  1:  4,  8).  Obeying  this 
command,  they  waited  and  prayed — "  all  continuing  with  one  ac- 
cord in  prayer  and  supplication"  "  until  the  day  of  Pentecost  had 
fully  come  ;  "  tlicn  "  a  sound  from  heaven  as  of  a  rushing  mighty 
wind"  gave  token  of  the  Spirit's  coming. 

As  to  the  divine  philosophy  of  this  arrangement — the  reason 
why  this  great  gift  of  the  Spirit — delayed  througli  all  the  ages  be- 
fore the  Messiah  came ;  kept  in  waiting  till  after  his  earthly  min- 
istry had  been  finished,  and  his  death  on  the  cross  had  trans- 
pired, and  u.p  to  the  very  point  of  his  ascension  and  enthrone- 
ment in  the  highest  heavens ; — we  can  not  mistake  widely  in  its 

solution. On  the  earthward  side  of  the  case,  it  was  fitting  that 

the  great  facts  and  truths  which  the  teaching  Spirit  would  make 
mighty  through  his  power  for  the  salvation  of  lost  men  should 
be  out — patent — ready  to  be  witnessed  unto  by  his  chosen  apos- 
tles, before  the  great  work  of  the  Spirit  should  commence.  As 
the  age  of  the  world,  beginning  with  Christ's  advent  and  fully  in- 
augurated at  his  ascension,  was  to  be  pre-eminently  the  dispensa- 
tion of  the  Spirit,  it  was  well  it  should  open  with  impressive 
manifestations,  at  once  illustrative  of  his  nature,  and  inspiring  to 
God's  people  through  all  the  onward  centuries. 

On  the  heavenward  side  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  consider  that 
Jesus  as  incarnate  had  not  been  seen  in  heaven — manifest  to  the 
view  of  its  glorious  hierarchies  of  angels  and  seraphim  before. 
It  was  fit  that  his  coming  should  be  a  marked  event — that  his  in- 
auguration should  be  (may  we  say)  an  high  day  in  the  heavenly 
world — that  infinite  honor  should  be  conferred  on  him  who 
throughout  his  earthly  life  had  been  "  despised  of  men  " — a  glor- 
ious testimony  to  the  loving  appreciation  in  which  he  was  held 
by  the  Infinite  Father. 

The  great  gift  of  the  Spirit  at  this  eventful  hour  witnesseth 
that  this  was  the  highest  favor  Jesus  chose  to  ask,  more  dear  to 
his  heart  than  all  others.  It  came  before  the  universe  as  the 
Father's  indorsement  of  the  scheme  of  salvation  to  which  the 
Son  was  fully  committed:  it  testified  that  henceforth  the  whole 
Deity — every  perfection  and  power  of  the  Triune  God — Father, 
Son,  and  Spirit — are  at  one  in  working  for  this  sublime  consum- 
mation— the  redemption  of  the  world  to  Christ.  It  was  deserved 
honor  to  the  IMighty  Conqueror  who  had  vanquished  Satan  and 
all  his  powers  of  darkness.  The  scene  suggested  to  Paul  the 
Roman  triumph  which  the  Senate  of  Rome  was  wont  to  grant  to 
her  grandest  conquerors  when  they  returned  to  her  proud  capital 
with  the  spoils  of  vanquished  nations.  With  this  triumph  in  his 
eye  as  an  illustration,  he  wrote — "  When  he  [Jesus]  ascended  up 
on  high,  he  led  his  captives  captive,"  i.  e.  gracing  his  triumphal 
march  as  he  entered  the  glorious  city  of  God;  and  "  gave  gifts  to 
men  " — rewards  of   honor  to  his  valiant  and   faithful   soldiers. 


130  GOSPEL  OF   JOHN.— CHAP.  VII. 

These  gifts  Paul  enumerates — "  Apostles,  prophets,  evangelists, 
pastors,  teachers  " — "  for  the  j^erfecting  of  the  saints,"  etc. — all  to 

be  specially  imbued  with  gifts  of  the  Spirit.     (Eph.  4  :  8-12). 

When  the  incarnate  Son  took  his  place  visibly  on  the  throne  of 
heaven  to  administer  the  reign  of  grace  over  this  fallen  but  re- 
deemed world,  it  was  supremely  appropriate  to  signalize  the  open- 
ino-  of  his  administration  by  very  special  effusions  of  the  Spirit. 
The  hosts  of  the  heavenly  world  were  then  able  to  understand 
the  grounds  and  reasons  of  this  honor  paid  to  the  Son,  and  of 
this  power  lodged  in  his  hands. 

Keturning  to  contemplate  the  words  in  vs.  37,  38,  as  part  of 
the  human  history  of  the  man  of  Nazareth,  let  us  think  of  their 
bearing  upon  a  question  we  often  ask — Did  Jesus  place  himself 
before  the  thousands  of  his  countrymen  as  truly  their  promised 

Messiah  ? The  records  of  his  public  life  speak  of  him  mostly 

as  being  in  remote  Galilee,  traversing  cities  and  villages,  heal- 
ing the  sick ;  casting  out  devils ;  teaching  his  disciples ;  occa- 
sionally, yet  rarely,  drawing  about  him  and  after  him  large 
crowds  of  people ; — but  not  often  in  Jerusalem,  and  only  on  few 
occasions  becoming  conspicuous  at  the  great  annual  festivals  of 
the  nation.  But  in  this  chapter  we  see  him  in  the  temple  on  the 
great  day  of  their  most  joyous  festival;  the  thousands  of  Israel 
are  gathered  there ;  and  his  time  has  fully  come  to  announce 
himself  as  their  Redeemer  and  Messiah.  'He  stood  and  cried;" 
taking  his  stand  conspicuously  in  the  presence  of  the  multitude, 
he  lifted  up  his  voice  as  one  who  had  an  important  message  to 
proclaim,  and  a  right  to  be  heard;  and  then  and  there,  in  words 
chosen  from  their  well  known  prophetic  scriptures,  he  declared — 
I  come  to  fulfill  in  myself  those  munificent  promises.  I  come  to 
give  the  waters  of  salvation  to  every  thirsty  and  believing  soul. 
If  any  man  thirsts,  let  him  come  unto  me  and  drink.  The  wa- 
ters I  give  shall  be  an  unfailing  fountain  in  his  soul;  a  well  of 
water  springing  up  unto  everlasting  life;  "rivers  of  living  water," 

flowing  out  in  blessings  to  others  if  so  they  will — never  to  fail. 

What  better  words  could  he  have  spoken  to  place  himself  before 
the  people  as  their  own  Messiah?  What  one  feature  in  the  scene 
could  be  changed  or  what  new  feature  added  to  make  the  whole 
more  impressive,  more  majestic,  more  tender,  and  yet  more  sub- 
lime? 

40.  Many  of  the  people  therefore,  when  they  heard  this 
saying,  said,  Of  a  truth  this  is  the  Prophet. 

41.  Others  said,  This  is  the  Christ.  But  some  said,  Shall 
Christ  come  out  of  Galilee  ? 

42.  Hath  not  the  Scripture  said,  That  Christ  cometh  of 
the  seed  of  David,  and  out  of  the  town  of  Bethlehem,  where 
David  w^as  ? 

43.  So  there  was  a  division  among  the  people  because  of 
him. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VII.  131 

Naturally  the  people  were  impressed.  Probably  the  officers, 
with  writ  of  arrest  in  hand,  were  within  hearing,  awed  by  the 
majesty  and  touched  by  the  tenderness  of  this  strange  man  and 
message,  to  say — "Never  man  spake  like  this  man."  Of  the 
people  some  declared — This  must  be  the  great  prophet;  others. 
This  is  the  Christ;  while  yet  others  stumbled  over  his  supposed 
Galilean  origin,  inasmuch  as  the  prophet  Micah  had  distinctly 
located  the  birth  of  their  nation's  Deliverer  in  Bethlehem — the 
second  David  coming  from  the  same  town  as  the  first. 

44.  And  some  of  them  would -have  taken  him,  "but  no 
man  laid  hands  on  him. 

"Some  would  have  taken  him." — Strangety  dead  to  the  sweet- 
ness and  glory  of  these  words  of  life ;  repelled  by  the  purity  and 
goodness  which  made  their  own  moral  ugliness  unendurable:  but 
they  were  too  few  to  carry  their  measures  against  the  greater 
number  who  admired  and  sustained; — so  that  no  man  laid  hands 
on  him.  It  is  plain  that  in  a  fair  field,  when  Jesus  spake  in 
sweetness  and  majesty  before  the  people,  he  had  the  hearts  of 
too  many  to  permit  the  small  and  malignant  minority  to  resort 
to  violence.  Hence  the  necessity  of  treachery  and  betrayal  in 
order  to  arrest  him  in  the  absence  of  the  multitude. 

45.  Then  came  the  officers  to  the  chief  priests  and  Phar- 
isees; and  they  said  unto  them,  AVhy  have  ye  not  brought 
him? 

46.  The  officers  answered,  Never  man  spake  Hke  this  man. 

The  officers  commissioned   to  arrest  him  return  their  writ — 

the  service  it  required  being  impracticable. 

"Why  did  ye  not  bring  the  culprit  before  us?" 

"Never  man  spake  like  this  man."     Did  they  mean  to  say — 

We  can  not  find  it  in  our  hearts  to  touch  him  ?     Or  only  this : 

The  people  will  not  let  us  ?    Perhaps,  nay  probably,  both.     The 

officers  make  no  further  reply. 

47.  Then  ansAvered  them  the  Pharisees,  Are  ye  also  de- 
ceived? 

48.  Have  any  of  tlie  rulers  or  of  the  Pharisees  believed 
on  him? 

49.  But  this  people  who  knoweth  not  the  law  are  cursed. 

The  Pharisees  seem  to  have  supposed  that  they  were  led  away — 
"  deceived"  they  call  it — by  the  words  and  the  manner  of  Jesus. 
Assuming  moreover  that  their  officers  must  have  been  influenced 
by  the  opinions  of  others  (some  men  can  never  think  of  any 
other  influence),  they  push  their  question; — "Have  any  of  the 
great  men,  whose  opinions  are  of  any  value,  believed  on  him?" 
Ye  can  not  be  so  senseless  as  to  care  for  the  notions  of  the  com- 
mon people — the  mere  rabble  who  know  nothing  of  the  law — 


132  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.   YII. 

miscreants,  all;  "accursed."  Hard  -words  these,  to  use  of  the 
common  people ;  but  they  indicate  the  self-conceit  and  moral  in- 
fatuation that  reigned  in  the  bosoms  of  the  Pharisees  "vvho  con- 
stituted the  Great  Sanhedrim. 

50.  Nicodemus  saitli  unto  tliem,  (he  that  came  to  Jesus 
by  night,  being  one  of  them,) 

51.  Doth  our  law  judge  any  man,  before  it  hear  him,  and 
know  Avhat  he  doeth  ? 

One  man — one  honest  man — was  there ;  the  same  Nicodemns 
of  Avhom  we  have  heard  before.  He  quietly  suggests  that  their 
law  did  not  judge  any  man  until  it  had  heard  him  in  his  own  de- 
fense,* and  learned  from  his  own  lips  what  he  was  doing  or  had 
done.  This  principle,  always  grandly  equitable — an  honor  to 
any  system  of  jurisprudence — he  suggested  should  be  applied  in 
the  present  case. Nicodemus  deserves  our  respect  for  this  dig- 
nified interposition.  Perhaps  he  was  not  sufficiently  resolute  and 
firm ;  and  perhaps  he  was.     At  least  he  made  his  point  forcibly. 

As  to  the  true  text  in  v.  50,  modern  critics  quite  unanimously  re- 
ject "  by  night;  "  Tischendorf  with  the  Sinaitic  omits  the  entire 
clause — "  He  that  came  to  Jesus  by  night;  "  while  Meyer  would 
have  it — "  Who  came  to  him  before.  '  All  accept  the  words — "Who 
Avas  one  of  them."     These  variations  have  no  doctrinal  importance. 

52.  They  ansAvered  and  said  unto  him,  Art  thou  also  of 
Galilee  ?  JSearch,  and  look :  for  out  of  Galilee  ariseth  no 
prophet. 

They  put  the  question,  "  Art  thou  also  of  Galileo?"  with  the 
same  Greek  interrogative  Avhich  Nicodemus  used  —  "Doth  our  laAV 
judge,"  etc.? — both  questions  implying  the  expectation  of  a  nega- 
tive answer.  The  Pharisees  Avould  say — We  know  thou  art  not  a 
Galilean  by  birth  ;  but  can  it  be  possible  that  thou  art  in  sympathy 
with  this  Galilean?  Wouldest  thou  take  sides  Avith  that  outlandish 
people  against  the  holy  city  and  the  holy  people  of  thine   OAvn 

country  ? Look  carefully  into  this  case.     No  great  prophet  ever 

did  or  can  come  out  of  Galilee.  Probably  they  would  have  said — 
If  God  should  discriminate  thus  against  his  OAvn  holy  city  and 
people  by  sending  the  Messiah  through  Galilean  blood  and  parent- 

■•■■  The  words  of  the  law  referred  to  are  of  this  sort:  "I  charged 
your  judges,  saying;  Hear  the  causes  between  j'our  brethren,  and 
judge  righteously  between  evei'y  man  and  his  neighbor,"  etc.  "Ye 
shall  not  respect  persons  in  judgment,  but  ye  shall  hear  tbe  small 
as  well  as  the  great,"  etc.  (Dent.  1 :  16,  17).  "  If  a  false  witness  rise 
up  against  any  man  to  testify  against  him  that  which  is  wrong, 
then  both  the  men  between  whom  the  controversy  is  shall  stand  be- 
fore the  Lord,  before  the  priest  and  tbe  judges  which  shall  be  in 
those  days;  and  the  judge  shall  make  diligent  inquisition,"  etc. 
(Deut.  19:  16-18). 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.   VIIT.  133 

ago,  a-vvay  with  him  ! — Bigotry  is  always  blind;  bigotry  strong  and 
fierce  as  theirs  Avas  doubly  so ;  for  in  the  first  place  God  did  raise 
up  some  old  prophets  from  Galilee,  e.  g.  Jonah  certainly  (2  Kings 
14:  25),  and  in  the  spirit  of  it  Elijah  also,  and  perhaps  others 
whose  birth-place  is  not  recorded  :  and  in  the  second  place,  Jesus 
was  not  born  in  Galileo,  but  in  Ijethlehem-Judah — as  they  should 
have  known. 

53.  And  every  man  went  unto  liis  own  house. 

This  verse  belongs  with  the  disputed  portion  of  chap.  8. — viz. 
vs.  1-11.     It  naturally  precedes  8:  1,  and  stands  or  falls  Avith  it. 


CHAPTER   YIII. 

The  opening  of  this  chapter  springs  a  new  and  truly  grave 
question ; — viz.  as  to  the  genuineness  of  the  passage  respecting 
the  woman  said  to  have  been  taken  in  adultery — (v.  1-11).  [The 
question  involves  also  the  last  v.  of  chap.  7.] 

The  objections  to  its  genuineness  are  certainly  very  strong ;  in 
the  view  of  the  ablest  and  most  thorough  critics,  decisive.  Sub- 
stantially the  objections,  external  and  internal,  are  as  follows. 

I.  The  external. 

I.  Of  the  four  oldest  and  most  important  manuscripts,  the  Vati- 
can and  Sinaitic  omit  precisely  these  verses.  The  Alexandrian 
and  the  Codex  Ephrem  omit  this  passage  and  somewhat  more  ;  viz. 
the  former  from  John  6  :  50  to  8 :  12,  and  the  latter  from  7 :  13  to 
8 :  34.  But  the  relative  size  of  the  space  wanting  seems  to  prove 
that  this  passage  was  never  in  those  manuscripts. — 2.  The  oldest 
and  best  manuscript  which  does  contain  this  passage — that  of  Beza 
gives  it  with  very  considerable  diversity  from  the  received  text. 
— 3.  A  large  number  of  manuscripts  dating  from  the  ninth  to  the 
twelfth  century  contain  it,  yet  with  very  great  variations — a  fact 
which  goes  strongly  against  the  genuineness  of  the  passage.  It 
should  be  noted  also  that  a  number  of  those  which  contain  the 
passage  in  substance,  locate  it,  not  here,  but  at  the  close  of  Luke 
21. — 4.  The  balance  of  testimony  from  the  church  ftithers  bears 
against  its  genuineness.* — 5.  It  is  wanting  in  the  most  ancient 
manuscripts  and  editions  of  the  Syriac  and  Coptic ;  but  appears 
in  the  Itala — the  oldest  Latin  version. 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  the  balance  of  external  evidence  is 
strongly  against  the  genuineness  of  this  passage. 

II.  As  to  the  internal  evidence  : 

*  It  is  at  least  not  named  by  Origen,  ApoUinaris,  Theodore  of  Mop- 
suestia,  Cyril,  Cbrysostom,  Basil,  TertuUian,  Cyprian.  [Tholuck]. 


13-4  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VIII. 

(1.)  There  is  strong  objection  to  this  as  its  original  and  natural 
place,  because  it  breaks  the  connection  of  thought,  and  has  no 

logical  or  other  relation  with  what  precedes  or  follows. (2.)  It 

also  contains  quite  a  number  of  words,  forms  of  expression  and 
connective  particles,  which  are  foreign  from  the  usage  of  John, 
and  therefore  strongly  against  the  theory  of  his  being  the  author. 

In  answer  to  the  question — How  came  the  passage  here?  and 
has  it  any  historical  authority  whatever? — the  hypothesis  which 
receives  most  favor  is  that,  in  substance,  it  is  historically  true; 
that  it  was  handed  down  through  several  centuries  by  tradition ; 
and  at  length  admitted  into  a  number  of  the  later  manuscripts. 
This  hypothesis  accounts  for  the  diversity  of  text  where  it  appears 
at  all,  and  for  its  ultimate  admission  into  our  received  version. 

The  passage  is  rejected  as  not  genuine  by  Tischendorf,  Mej'-er, 
Tholuck,  Olshausen  and  Alford.  Ellicott  holds  somewhat  decid- 
edly that  it  was  not  written  by  John;  Farrar  has  "  no  shadow  of 
doubt  that  the  incident  really  happened,  even  if  the  form  in  which 
it  is  preserved  to  us  is  by  no  means  indisputably  genuine." 

From  V.  12  onward,  we  have  an  animated  discussion  between 
Jesus  and  the  captious,  hostile  Pharisees; — Jesus  presents  him- 
self as  the  light  of  the  world;  his  opponents  question  his  testimony 
(vs.  12-20) :  Jesus  repeats  his  previous  declaration  as  to  going 
away  whither  they  could  not  come,  and  meets  their  question — 
"Who  art  thou?"  (vs.  21-30):  A  remark  by  Jesus  to  certain 
young  converts — "  If  ye  continue  in  my  word,  the  truth  shall  make 
you  free" — stirred  up  his  opponents  to  aver  that  they  were  Abra- 
ham's children  and  never  in  bondage  (v.  31-33),  but  Jesus  declares 
that  they  were  in  bondage  to  the  devil,  were  Ms  children  and  doing 
his  work  (vs.  34-47).  The  Jews  retort,  charging  Jesus  with  being 
a  Samaritan  and  possessed  with  a  devil  (vs.  48-53),  to  which  Jesus 
makes  his  final  reply,  affirming  himself  to  have  been  before  Abra- 
ham was.  They  take  up  stones  to  stone  him  as  their  only  adequate 
reply,  but  he  escapes  their  vengeance  (vs.  54-50). 

1.  Jesus  went  unto  the  mount  of  Olives. 

2.  And  early  in  the  morning  he  came  again  into  the  tem- 
ple, and  all  the  people  came  unto  him ;  and  he  sat  down,- 
and  taught  them. 

3.  And  the  scribes  and  Pharisees  brought  unto  him  a 
woman  taken  in  adultery ;  and  when  they  had  set  her  in 
the  midst, 

4.  They  say  unto  him,  Master,  this  woman  was  taken  in 
adultery,  in  the  very  act. 

5.  Now  Moses  in  the  law  commanded  us,  that  such 
should  be  stoned':  but  what  sayest  thou? 

6.  This  they  said,  tempting  him,  that  they  might  have 
to  accuse  him.  But  Jesus  stooped  down,  and  with  his  finger 
wrote  on  the  ground,  as  though  he  heard  them  not. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOILN\— CILVr.  VIII.  .135 

7.  So  when  they  continued  asking  him,  he  lifted  up  him- 
self, find  said  unto  them,  He  that  is  without  sin  among  you, 
let  him  first  cast  a  stone  at  her. 

8.  And  again  he  stooped  down,  and  wrote  on  the  ground. 

9.  And  they  whicli  heard  it,  being  convicted  by  their  oxvn 
conscience,  went  out  one  by  one,  beginning  at  the  eldest,  even 
unto  the  last:  and  Jesus  was  left  alone,  and  the  woman 
standing  in  the  midst. 

10.  When  Jesus  had  lifted  up  himself,  and  saw  none  but 
the  woman,  he  said  unto  her.  Woman,  Avhere  are  those 
thine  accusers  ?  hath  no  man  condemned  thee  ? 

11.  She  said,  No  man.  Lord.  And  Jesus  said  unto  her. 
Neither  do  I  condemn  thee  :  go,  and  sin  no  more. 

In  so  far  as  the  inspired  authority  of  this  passage  hecomes 
doubtful  will  its  interpretation  lose  both  interest  and  importance. 
In  my  view  it  has  only  a  modified,  weakened  demand  upon  us  fur 
exposition  of  its  meaning,  or  for  defense  of  the  course  of  our 
Lord  as  here  presented.     A  few  words  must  suflice. 

The  great  questions  have  been  these : 

(a.)  Was  the  allegation  against  this  woman  true  or  false? 

(6.)  Ill  lohat  loay  did  the  scribes  hope  to  tempt  Jesus,  and  find 
means  to  accuse  him  ? 

(f.)  Of  xohat  were  they  convicted  by  their  own  conscience,  and 
why  did  they  withdraw? 

{d.)  On  what  ground  did  Jesus  refuse  to  condemn  this  woman? 

(e. )  What  moral  lessons  (if  any)  are  taught  here  ? 

Taking  these  questions  in  their  order,  I  suggest  as  to  the  first: 

{a.)  That  the  allegation  is  probably  to  be  taken  as  true  because 
it  would  be  too  hazardous  to  make  if  false;  would  react  severely 
upon  false  accusers ;  and  because  Jesus  seems  to  imply  tacitly 
that  she  had  sinned — i.  e.  in  the  respect  charged. 

■  (6.)  It  may  be  supposed  that  they  hoped  to  entangle  him  in  the 
dilemma  between  condemn  and  acquit,  inasmuch  as  to  condemn 
would  put  him  in  collision  with  the  Koman  civil  authorities,  then 
in  the  ascendant,  although  to  the  Jewish  courts  irksome  and 
odious ;  while  to  acquit  would  put  him  in  antagonism  against  Mo- 
ses.  Or,  on  the  supposition  that  the  case  has  no  relations  to 

the  Roman  authorities,  it  is  generally  admitted  that  the  law  of 
Moses  against  adultery  had  become  mostly  inoperative,  public 
feeling  and  usage  being  against  it.  Hence  to-  condemn  would 
bring  Jesus  into  odium  before  the  people;  to  acquit,  would  ex- 
pose him  to  the  charge  of  dishonoring  ]\loses  and  the  ancient  law. 

(c.)  Convicted  of  malicious  designs  against  Jesus,  and  perhaps 
of  being  personally  guilty  of  the  very  crime  charged  against  this 
woman.  According  to  history  the  Kabbis  of  that  age  were  in 
this  respect  flagrant  oS"enders. 

(t?.)  Apparently  on  the  ground  of  having  no  jurisdiction  in  the 


136  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VIII. 

case.  The  prosecution  had  disappeared.  There  remained  no 
case  before  him.  There  was  not  the  least  occasion  therefore  for 
him  to  pass  judgment  upon  the  wisdom  or  authority  of  the  law 
of  Moses ;  or  upon  the  innocence  or  guilt  of  this  woman,  even  on 
the  yet   doubtful  supposition  that  uncle?-  any  circumstances   he 

would  become  a  court  of  justice  for  a  criminal  prosecution. 

Consequently  ho  did  not  decide  (as  some  have  supposed)  that  men 
— themselves  in  sin — ought  never  to  administer  civil  law — /.  c. 
ought  never  to  condemn  others  while  in  some  sense  more  or  less 
guilty  themselves.  Nor  did  he  decide  that  a  criminal  Avho  gives 
evidence  of  penitence  is  therefore  and  on  that  ground  to  be  dis- 
charged as  not  guilty. It  should  be  very  carefully  noted  that 

civil  jurisdiction  is  one  thing;  a  merely  moral  jurisdiction  quite 
another; — that  Jesus  was  among  men,  not  as  a  civil  magistrate — 
not  a  court  of  justice  under  civil  government;  but  as  a  teacher  of 
moral  truth,  dealing  with  the  human  heart  and  conscience  as  an 
individual  and  not  as  a  public  magistrate. 

(e.)  As  to  the  moral  lessons  of  this  passage,  I  am  mainly  im- 
pressed with  the  obvious  fact  that  Jesus  aimed  at  only  moral  re- 
sults. At  these  he  did  aim  ;  at  once  wisely,  earnestly,  and  suc- 
cessfully. Toward  his  accusers  who  sought  to  ensnare  him,  his 
words  and  no  less  his  manner  were  fraught  with  scorching  re- 
bute,  laying  bare  to  their  own  eye  the  malignity  of  their  heart 
and  the  rottenness  of  their  professions.  There  is  scarcely 
another  case  on  record  in  which  his  assailants  so  manifestly 
quailed  and  recoiled  from  before  him.  Rarely,  if  ever,  did  they 
so  feel  the  jiower  of  his  kindness  and  compassion  toward  the  err- 
ing, put  in  contrast  with  their  own  heartless  severity  and  shame- 
less hypocrisy. 

Then  as  toward  this  woman — cruelly  sinned  against  in  the 
manner  of  her  exposure,  yet  having  sinned  under  circumstances, 
we  know  not  whether  more  or  less  aggravated,  his  bearing  was 
marked  by  thoughtful  compassion,  adapted  as  best  it  could  be  to 
lead  her  to  repentance.  Having  no  responsibilities  as  a  civil  mag- 
istrate, to  what  should  he  turn  his  attention  and  direct  his  efforts, 
but  this — to  reclaim  her  from  a  life  of  sin  and  shame,  and  to  save 

her  soul  ?- The  example  of  Jesus  in  this  respect  should  stand 

before  his  ftdlowers  as,  in  spirit  at  least,  supremely  worthy  of  im- 
itation. It  was  never  intended  to  bear  upon  the  question  of  civil 
law,  or  the  duty  of  civil  magistrates  to  enforce  wholesome  law. 
Jesus  was  not  acting  in  any  such  capacity.  He  gave  no  opinion, 
loft  no  example,  bearing  upon  civil  jurisprudence.  But  upon  the 
moral  and  spiritual  duties  of  all  good  men  and  women  toward  the 
fallen,  it  reads  us  lessons  at  once  wholesome,  wise,  and  heavenly. 

12.  Then  spake  Je.sus  again  unto  them,  saying,  I  am  the 
light  of  the  world:  lie  that  followeth  me  shall  not  walk  in 
darkness,  but  shall  have  the  light  of  life. 

"Spake  again" — resuming  the  discourse  which  closed  John  7: 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAP.  VIII.  137 

44.     Another  chapter  or  section   of  this  discourse  stands  in  a's. 

21-30  below. "  I  am   the  light   of  the  world  " — in  point  of 

moral  instruction  Avhat  the  sun  is  for  the  material  light.  The 
light  I  shod  illumines  the  path  of  all  those  who  follow  me.  They 
shall  have  "the  light  of  life" — all  needed  light  to  guide  them 

unto  eternal  life. Some  critics  suppose  that  the  words — "  I  am 

the  light" — were  suggested  to  Jesus  by  the  great  chandeliers  of 
the  temple  which  were  lit  up  during  some  at  least  of  the  eve- 
nings of  this  feast.  While  the  people  were  admiring  and  enjoying 
their  brilliant  light,  Jesus  would  say — In  the  true  and  far  higher 

sense,  I  am   the  light  of  the  whole  world. Such  reference  is 

perhaps  supposable ;  but  we  may  fitly  remember  that  Jesus  had 
used  this  figure  long  before,  even  in  the  sermon  on  the  mount 
(Matt.  5  :  14-16),  and  that  John  also  had  spoken  of  Jesus  (1  :  4- 
9)  as  "  the  light,"  "  the  true  light,"  etc. 

13.  The  Pharisees  therefore  said  unto  him,  Thou  bearest 
record  of  thyself;  thy  record  is  not  true. 

14.  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  tliera,  Though  I  bear 
record  of  myself,  yet  my  record  is  true :  for  I  know  whence 
I  came,  and  whither  I  go;  but  ye  can  not  tell  whence  I 
come,  and  whither  I  go. 

"Bearest  record"  translates  the  Greek  verb  for  icstifij.  They 
mean  to  say  that  Jesus  was  his  own  and  his  only  witness ;  and 
they  imply  that  any  impostor  could  do  as  much ;  that  any  mere 
pretender  might  be  expected  to  make  out  a  good  story  for  him- 
self  .Tesus  replies :  It  is  appropriate  that  I  should  testify  of 

myself  My  testimony  of  myself  is  true  because  I  know  whence 
I  came  and  whither  I  go.  1  know  with  infinite  certainty  that  I 
came  forth  from  God  my  Father,  and  shall  soon  return  to  him 
again — things  of  which  you  can  have  no  such  conscious  knowl- 
edge. And  nothing  can  be  more  obvious  than  that  the  real  Mes- 
siah— he  who  was  anointed  and  sent  forth  from  God — must  have 
this  perfect  consciousness  of  his  mission,  and  therefore  by  virtue 
of  his  own  nature  must  be  the  first  and  best  witness  of  his  own 
Messiahship. 

15.  Ye  judge  after  the  flesh;  I  judge  no  man. 

16.  And  yet  if  I  judge,  my  judgment  is  true :  for  I  am 
not  alone,  but  I  and  the  Father  that  sent  me. 

17.  It  is  also  written  in  your  law,  that  the  testimony  of 
two  men  is  true. 

18.  I  am  one  that  bear  witness  of  myself,  and  the  Father 
that  sent  me  beareth  witness  of  me. 

"  Judge  after  the  flesh,"  is  in  tacit  contrast  wath  judging  after 
the  spirit,  and  involves  imperfection,  frailty,  error.  Jesus  may 
in  this  case  have  thought  of  their  carnal  views  of  the  Messiah 
and  his  kingdom  ;^of  their  fleshly  and  false  notions  which  perpet- 


138  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VIII. 

ually  perverted  their  ideas  of  himself  and  his  work. "I  judge 

no  man,"  so — i.  e.  as  ye  judge  me.  Or  his  thought  may  have 
been — "I  judge  no  man  now  ;  my  mission  to  the  world  at  this 
time  is  not  to  judge,  but  to  save.  Yet  it  must  be  conceded  that 
the  context  does  not  specially  favor  this  supposed  reference  to 
passing  judgment  upon  human  character  and  destiny.  The  course 
of  thought  is  rather  upon  judging  as  to  his  personal  claims  to  be 
the  Messiah.  So  far  as  I  do  testify  ("judge'  )  of  myself,  my  tes- 
timony is  true,  for  I  am  not  alone :  the  Father  who  sent  me  bears 
witness  of  me ;  and  by  your  own  law,  the  testimony  of  two  wit- 
nesses is  conclusive.     (See  Deut.  17:  5  and  19:  15). 

19.  Then  said  they  unto  him,  Where  is  thy  Father?  Je- 
sus answered,  Ye  neither  know  me,  nor  my  Father :  if  ye 
had  known  me,  ye  should  liave  known  my  Father  also. 

20.  These  words  spake  Jesus  in  the  treasury,  as  he  taught 
in  the  temple :  and  no  man  laid  hands  on  him ;  for  his  hour 
was  not  yet  come. 

The  keenest  insult  was  purposely  couched  under  the  question, 
"Where  is  thy  Father?"  The  question  utterly  ignored  his  claim 
to  be  the  Son  of  God: — You  talk  much  about  your  Father;  what 

do  you  mean? — Where  is  that  Father? Their  notions  on  this 

point  are  brought  out  (John  6 :  42) ;  "  They  said,  Is  not  this  Je- 
sus, the  son  of  Joseph,  whose  father  and  mother  we  know?" 

It  is  to  this  attitude  of  their  mind  that  Jesus  replies  :  "  Ye  neither 
know  me  nor  my  Father:  if  ye  had  known  me,  ye  should  have 
known  my  Father  also." 

The  "  treasury  "  was  a  precinct  of  the  temple  in  which  gifts, 
brought  for  the  temple  service,  were  deposited.  (See  Mark  12: 
41). "No  man  laid  hands  on  him" — all  his  enemies  being  re- 
strained by  some  agency  of  God's  providence:  perhaps  the  pres- 
ence and  demonstrations  of  too  many  friends  ready  to  protect  him. 
The  fact  that  ultimately  his  enemies  were  compelled  to  hire  a 
traitor  to  guide  them  to  his  place  of  retirement  that  they  might 
arrest  him  in  the  absence  of  the  multitude,  favors  this  explana- 
tion. 

21.  Then  said  Jesus  again  unto  them,  I  go  my  way,  and 
ye  shall  seek  me,  and  shall  die  in  your  sins :  whither  I  go 
ye  can  not  come. 

22.  Then  said  the  Jews,  Will  he  kill  himself?  because  he 
saith.  Whither  I  go,  ye  can  not  come. 

23.  And  he  said  unto  them,  Ye  are  from  beneath;  I  am 
from  above  :  ye  are  of  this  world  ;  I  am  not  of  this  world. 

24.  I  said  therefore  unto  you,  that  ye  shall  die  in  your 
sins:  for  if  ye  believe  not  that  I  am  he,  ye  shall  die  in  your 
sins. 

"I  go  my  way,  on  my  mission.     We  must  part  company  for- 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VIII.  139 

ever,  since  ye  ivill  not  follow  me,  and  I  can  noithcv  go  nor  stay 

with  you." "  Ye  shall  seek  mo" — in  the  day  of  your  calamity, 

Avhon  it  shall  be  all  too  late  ! It  is  better  to  apply  these  words 

to  their  individual  and  personal  rather  than  national  relations  to 
Christ.  What  is  true  of  all  sinners  must  be  true  likewise  of  those 
individual  men.  Eejecting  Jesus,  they  will  sooner  or  later  come 
to  sorrow;  will  feci  their  want  of  a  Savior  and  would  fain  seek 

him — if  then   it  could  be  of  any  avail. "  Shall  die    in   your 

sins" — or  in  the  expressive  form  of  the  Greek — "In  your  sin,  j-e 
shall  die!"  In  your  one,  all-comprehensive,  and  fatal  sin  of  un- 
belief, ye  must  die  forever !  With  mournful  and  solemn  empha- 
sis we  must  suppose  these  woi'ds  fell  from  those  blessed  lips,  sug- 
gested by  the  contrast  between  his  future  and  theirs — himself 
going  so  soon  to  dwell  with  the  Father  in  blessedness  perfect  and 
eternal;  they  "going  to  their  own  place"  to  meet  the  doom  of  the 
guilty  and  the  lost !  "  Whither  I  go  ye  can  not  come  ;  "  my  home 
is  no  home  for  you;  with  spirit  utterly  uncongenial — of  character 
totally  unlike — under  the  sternest  of  all  necessities,  ye  must  go  to 
an  abode  and  to  a  destiny  far  other  than  mine. 

The  Jews  said — "  Will  he  kill  himself"  to  get  beyond  our  reach  ? 
For  they  saw  in  his  words — perhaps  in  his  tone  and  manner — 
that  he  thought  of  death  as  parting  them  asunder.  But  did  they, 
at  this  stage  of  their  persecution,  surmise  that  he  would  go,  not  by 
suicide,  but  by  their  own  murderous  hand?  Wicked  men,  led 
on  by  Satan,  are  not  always  aware  how  far  they  may  be  pushed 
on  in  wickedness. — The  Jews  had  a  special  abhorrence  of  sui- 
cide, yet  did  not  shrink  from  imputing  it  (supposably)  to  Jesus. 

The  thought  of  Jesus  was  upon  the  contrast  between  them  and 
himself;  "  Yq  are  from  beneath  ;  I  am  from  above  :  "  ye  are  from 
Satan — his  pupils,  followers,  servants  :  I  came  down  from  my 
Fathei'.  "Ye  are  of  this  world,"  acting  upon  its  principles;  im- 
bued with  its  spirit ;  obeying  its  behests — in  all  which  1  have  not 
the  least  sympathy.  It  was  for  this  reason  that  I  said  unto  you, 
"  Ye  shall  die  in  your  sins."     There  can  be  no  other  result  of 

such  a  character  and  such  a  life  as  yours. "If  ^'•e  believe  not 

that  I  am" — this  is  the  precise  translation  and  sense  of  the 
Greek: — if  ye  believe  not  in  me  as  the  unchangeable  "  I  am  " — 
said  (as  it  seems)  with  reference  to  the  name  of  the  revealing 
God,  given  to  Moses  at  the  bush  (Ex.  3 :  14).  We  find  the  same 
Greek  word  in  vs.  28  and  58  below; — "When  ye  have  lifted  up 
the  Son  of  man,  then  shall  ye  know  that  I  am" — i.  e.  that  I  am 
truly  divine — the  very  Son  of  God.  "Before  Abraham  was,  I 
am;" — my  eternal  being  was  moving  on  its  career  of  existence 

long  before  Abraham  lived. In  the  passage  before  us  (v.  24) 

the  literal  translation  impresses  me  as  far  more  significant  and 
forcible  than  that  of  the  English  version — "  I  am  he."  It  will  seem 
so,  1  judge,  to  most  readers  unless  they  take  the  word  "Ae"  in 
the  sense  which  appears  in  some  Old  Testament  passages  (e.  g. 
Deut.  82 :  39  and  Isa.  41 :  4  and  48 :  12)  where  the  Hebrew  pro- 
noun for  he  is  put  with  a  peculiar  emphasis  for  the  name  of  God. 


140  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  Vlll. 

Is   it  not  si'.pposable  that  this  was  in  the  mind  of  the  English 
translators  ? 

25.  Then  said  tliey  unto  him,  Who  art  thou  ?  And  Je- 
sus saith  unto  them,  Even  the  same  that  I  said  unto  you 
from  the  beginning. 

The  spirit  of  this  question  (made  by  the  Greek  word  ftj) 
seems  to  be — What  kind  of  a  being  or  person  art  thou  ?  What 
dost  thou  pretend  to  be  ? The  answer  has  been  explained  va- 
riously by  able  critics  ;  some  giving  it — What  I  told  you  at  the 
beginning ;  while  some  would  put  these  same  words  in  the  inter- 
rogative form —  What  have  I  told  you,  etc.  ?  others  thus  :  Funda- 
mentally, comprehensively,  what  I  have  said;  or  thus  :  Essentially 
what  my  words  show;  estimate  what  I  am  by  what  I  say;  or 
what  I  have  said  all  along,  from  the  very  first.  These  shades  of 
diiference  are  of  no  great  account  in  the  general  discussion. 

26.  I  have  many  things  to  say  and  to  judge  of  you  :  but 
he  that  sent  me  is  true;  and  I  speak  to  the  world  those 
things  which  I  have  heard  of  him. 

27.  They  understood  not  that  he  sj^ake  to  them  of  the 
Father. 

Ye  asli  me  who  I  am.  I  have  already  said  much  in  answer  to 
that  question.  1  could  say  much  more,  and  much  in  rebuke  and 
condemnation  of  your  unbelief:  but,  obstinate  as  your  unbelief  is, 
he  who  sent  me  is  true,  and  all  his  words  sent  through  me  to  the 
world  are  true.     I  speak  those  truthful  words  and  none  other. 

Such  seems  to  be  the  drift  and  connection  of  thought  in  v. 

26. Yet  even  then  they  failed  to  see  that  he  spake  of  God  the 

Father. 

28.  Then  said  Jesus  unto  tliem,  When  ye  have  lifted  uj) 
the  Son  of  man,  then  shall  ye  know  that  I  am  he,  and  that 
I  do  nothing  of  myself;  but  as  my. Father  hath  taught 
me,  I  speak  these  things. 

29.  And  he  that  sent  me  is  with  me :  the  Father  hath 
not  left  me  alone;  for  I  do  always  those  things  that  please 
him. 

30.  As  he  spake  these  words,  many  believed  on  him. 

"  Lifted  up  the  Son  of  man  " — signifying  by  what  death  he 
should  die  at  their  hand.  (See  the  phrase  repeated  and  explained 
in  John  12 :  32,  33).  At  his  death  and  thereafter,  new  and  more 
impressive  proofs  would  appear  of  his  true  Messiahship.  Amid 
the  scenes  of  the  crucifixion,  some  would  cry  out,  "  Verily,  this 
was  the  Son  of  God"  (Matt.  27:  54,  and  Mark  15  :  39).  His  res- 
urrection would  bring  yet  other  confirmations  of  his  mission  from 
heaven.     The  descent  of  the  Spirit  would  bear  home  these  new 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VIII.  141 

testimonies  to  many  hearts. The  points  then  to  be  shown  (as 

here  put)  were  his  divine  nature  ;  his  mission  from  God  ;  his  un- 
selfish fidelity  to  his  trust;  that  the  Father  stood  by  him,  indors- 
ing, approving,  sustaining,  with  his  manifested  love.  It  was  the 
joy  of  this  "  man  of  sorrows,"  that  though  rejected  and  forsaken 
of  men,  he  was  neither  rejected  nor  forsaken  of  the  Father. 

At  this  stage  of  the  discussion,  the  historian  pauses  to  say  that 
"many  believed  on  him."  Was  it  that  this  allusion  to  his  death 
was  tenderly  effective  ;  that  these  views  of  his  relation  to  the 
Father  seemed  to  them  just  and  convincing?  Yet  it  should  be 
said — !Many  critics,  assuming  that  the  rest  of  this  chapter  refers 
to  these  same  believers,  explain  away  their  belief  as  being  en- 
tirely superficial  and  transient.  We  must  (in  the  sequel)  in- 
quire whether  this  assumption  is  justified. 

31.  Then  said  Jesus  to  tliose  Jews  wliicli  believed  on  him, 
If  ye  continue  in  my  word,  then  are  ye  my  disciples  indeed  ; 

32.  And  ye  shall  know  the  truth,  and  the  truth  shall 
make  you  free. 

Turning  to  these  professed  believers,  Jesus  admonishes  them  to 
continue  in  his  word,  with  docility  and  loving  obedience.  So 
should  they  know  the  truth  more  and  more,  and  this  truth  would 
redeem  their  souls  from  the  dominion  of  sin — make  them  y?'ee  in 
the  high  and  glorious  sense  of  spiritual  emancipation  from  the 
slaveiy  of  sinful  passion.  The  admonition  assumes  danger  in 
their  case  lest  they  might  be  drawn  away  from  him  so  as  to  reject 
his  word  and  come  under  their  old  bondage  to  sin. 

33.  They  answered  him,  We  be  Abraham's  seed,  and  were 
never  in  bondage  to  any  man :  how  sayest  thou.  Ye  shall  be 
made  free? 

Here  the  first  question  is — Who  are  included  under  the  word 
"  thaj  V  Must  we  answer — The  converts  just  before  spoken  of 
as  "  believing  on  him"  ?  ^ome  commentators  assume  this;  but 
(as  it  seems  to  me)  against  the  probabilities  of  the  case.  There 
is  no  necessity  for  identifying  these  respondents  with  the  believ- 
ing Jews  spoken  of  in  v.  31.  In  scriptural  usage,  the  antecedent 
to  the  pronoun  can  not  always  be  determined  by  proximity ;  we 
must  not  alwa^'s  take  the  nearest  word  for  the  true  antecedent. 
The  sacred  writers  give  their  readers  large  scope  for  the  use  of 
their  good  sense  (e.  g.  Isa.  37:  36,  last  part;  also  Psa.  7:  11,  12). 
Old  Testament  usage  is  remarkably  controlled  by  this  principle 
of  common  sense.  It  should  not  surprise  us  to  find  more  or  less 
of  the  same  usage  pervading  the  New. 

Jesus  had  said  to  those  that  believed — "  The  truth  shall  make 
you  free" — to  be  slaves  no  longer.  Thereupon  those  who  had 
been  debating  with  Jesus  in  hostile,  prejudiced  mood,  throughout 
this  chapter,  are  offended  at  his  implying  that  they  were  not  free 
men  but  slaves;  and  therefore  thev  repel  the  implied  charge: — 
7 


142  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VIII. 

Do  not  insinuate  that  we  arc  slaves.  "  We  are  children  of  Abra- 
ham, and  have  never  been  in  bondage  to  any  man."     What  can 

you  mean  by  saying — "  Ye  shall  be  made  free"  ? Those  Jews 

took  pride  not  only  in  being  the  children  of  Abraham,  but  in 
their  national  and  personal  liberty — never  in  fealty  to  any  human 
power.  It  was  at  that  very  time  a  hotly  contested  question 
whether,  and  to  what  extent,  if  any,  they  were  under  the  juris- 
diction of  Rome. 

34.  Jesus  answered  them,  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you, 
AVhosoever  committeth  sin  is  the  servant  of  sin. 

35.  And  the  servant  abideth  not  in  the  house  for  ever : 
hut  the  Son  abideth  ever. 

36.  If  the  Son  therefore  shall  make  you  free,  ye  shall  be 
free  indeed. 

Jesus  neither  thought  of  nor  much  cared  for  freedom  in  the 
political  sense.  Going  far  deeper  than  that,  he  insists  that  every 
sinner  is  a  slave.  In  committing  sin  he  yields  to  a  master;  he 
surrenders  himself  to  do  the  will  of  the  devil ;  his  own  lusts 
ovei'power  his  better  judgment  and  reason.  lie  is  absolutely  in 
bondage — a  bondage  at  once  tyrannous,  terrible,  humiliating,  dis- 
graceful. Then,  recurring  to  the  figure  of  servitude  [slavery]  he 
contrasts  the  state  of  the  slave  in  the  household  with  that  of  the 
son.  The  slave  has  no  permanent  home  there;  no  rights  of 
home;  may  be  ejected  at  any  time;  at  best  (if  a  Jew)  serves  out 
his  time  in  six  years — if  of  Gentile  birth,  in  fifty — and  goes. 
The  son  is  the  heir,  and  is  at  home  there  with  no  limit  of  time. 
If  now  the  Son  of  man  gives  you  the  rights  of  freemen  in  God's 
house  ye  are  indeed  free — not  otherwise. 

37.  I  know  that  ye  are  Abraham's  seed ;  but  3'e  seek  to 
kill  me,  because  my  word  hath  no  place  in  you. 

38.  I  speak  that  which  I  have  seen  with  my  Father: 
and  ye  do  that  which  ye  have  seen"  with  your  father. 

39.  They  answered  and  said  unto  him,  Abraham  is  our 
father.  Jesus  saith  unto  them,  If  ye  were  Abraham's  chil- 
dren, ye  would  do  the  works  of  Abraham. 

40.  But  now  ye  seek  to  kill  me,  a  man  that  hath  told  you 
the  truth,  which  I  have  heard  of  God :  this  did  not  Abra- 
ham. 

Jesus  admits  that  thc}^  are  the  "seed,"  but  denies  that  they  are 
"children"  of  Abraham.*  They  were  unquestionably  born  in 
his  lineage,  but,  as  unquestionably,  were  aliens  in  spirit  and 
character;  utterly  far  from  being  children  of  Abraham  in  the 
sense  of  bearing  his   image   and  inheriting  his  virtues. Ye 

-■■He  snys  they  are  "  cr-rpunj"  but  not  "  rf/ii-'a." 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAl'.  VIII.  143 

seek  to  kill  inc  because  I  tell  you  the  truth  -which  1  have  heard 
from  God.  Abraham  never  did  any  thing  like  this — never  could 
have  done  it.  Abraham  Avas  eminently  "  the  friend  of  God  "  (2 
Chron.  j20:  7,  and  Isa.  41:8,  and  James  2  :  23)  obedient  to  every 
command,  of  unshaken  faith  in  eveiy  promise.  In  evei-y  point 
they  Avere  totally  unlike  Abraham — children  of  another  father ; 
men  of  entirely  opposite  character. 

Of  course  those  words  cut  into  their  pride  and  self-conceit  with 
unsparing  faithfulness. 

41.  Ye  do  the  deeds  of  your  father.  Then  said  they  to 
him,  We  be  not  born  of  fornication;  ^\•e  have  one  Father, 
even  God. 

42.  Jesus  said  unta  them,  If  God  were  your  Father,  ye 
Avould  love  me:  for  I  proceeded  forth  and  came  from  God; 
neither  came  I  of  myself,  but  he  sent  me. 

43.  Why  do  ye  not  understand  my  speech?  even  because 
ye  can  not  hear  my  word. 

44.  Ye  are  of  your  father  the  devil,  and  the  lusts  of  your 
father  ye  will  do:  he  was  a  murderer  from  the  beginning, 
and  abode  not  in  the  truth,  because  there  is  no  truth  in  him. 
"When  he  speaketh  a  lie,  he  speifketh  of  his  own :  for  he  is 
a  liar,  and  the  father  of  it. 

45.  And  because  I  tell  you  the  truth,  ye  believe  me  not. 

To  men  making  so  much  account  as  these  Jews  did  of  parent- 
age, it  was  both  pertinent  and  forcible  to  speak  of  them  as  chil- 
dren of  him  whose  spirit  they  inherited  and  whose  deeds  they 
Avere  reproducing.  So  Jesus  said,  "  Ye  do  the  deeds  of  your 
father,"  showing  whose  children  ye  are  by  the  sort  of  deeds  ye 
arc  doing.  Sharply  resenting  this  remark  they  declared  them- 
selves born  in  honest  matrimony,  and  said  they  had  but  one  Father, 
viz,  God.  But  here  they  were  persecuting  with  mortal  hatred 
God's  only  and  well-beloved  Son — proof  enough  that  they  had  no 
ground  whatever  for  assuming  themselves  to  be  children  of  God. 
If  God  were  jour  Father  and  ye  were  his  dutiful,  loving  children, 
ye  would  love  me — not  hate  me  Avithout  cause  and  with  sjjirit  so 
malignant. 

In  V.  43  the  exact  thought  seems  to  be — Why  do  ye  not  under- 
stand my  plain  Avords  ?  Because  ye  can  not  hear — in  the  sense 
of  can  not  bear  my  doctrine — the  substance  of  the  truth  I  teach. 

As  those  malicious  Jcaa's  Avith  murder  in  their  heart  had  boldly 
declared  that  their  one  Father  Avas  God,  Jesus  responded  with  like 
plainness  of  speech: — "Ye  are  of  your  father  the  devil,  and  the 
lusts  of  your  father  ye  will  to  do  " — do  with  the  Avill — the  real 
clioice  and  purpose  of  your  souls.  From  the  beginning  of  the 
race — from  the  age  of  EA'e  and  of  Cain, — he  Avas  a  mui'derer,  and 
stood  not  in  the  truth  ;  his  moral  status  Avas  never  there  but  ahvays 
in   the   moral  opposite  of  truth — in  lies.     There  AA'as  neA'er  any 


144  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VIII. 

truth  in  liiin— no  love  for  truth — no  speaking  of  truth.  Speaking 
lies  is  but  uttering  his  own  heart,  for  he  is  a  liar  and  the  father 
of  it — the  lie.  Pregnant  with  falsehood,  he  naturally  brings  forth 
lies;  they  are  his  legitimate  offspring.  In  this  sense  heis  "the 
father  of  lies." Those  Jews  claimed  to  be  children  of  Abra- 
ham in  the  sense  o'f  inheriting  his  virtues.  Precisely  in  this  sense 
Jesus  declared  that  they  were  children  of  the  devil,  for  they  in- 
herited his  spirit  of  falsehood  and  lies.  It  was  because  they  had 
no  natural  sympathy  with  truth  that  they  could  not  and  would  not 
believe  Jesus  and  his  truthful  words. 

46.  "Which  of  you  convinceth  me  of  sin  ?  And  if  I  s.ay  tlie 
truth,  why  do  ye  not  believe  me? 

47.  He  that  is  of  God  heareth  God's  Avords :  ye  therefore 
hear  them  not,  because  ye  are  not  of  God. 

They  had  held  Jesus  guilty,  but  without  convicting  him  of  any 
crime  or  falsehood  whatever.  They  had  simply  assumed  him 
guilty  without  proof;  and  this  because  they  hated  his  just  rebukes 

of  their  sin. If  I  say  the  truth  (and  ye  can  not  deny  that  I 

do),  why  do  ye  not  believe  me? He  proceeds  to  answer  his 

own  question : — T.he  words  I  bring  to  you  are  words  of  God.  If 
ye  were  of  God,  his  childrej),  in  sympathy  with  his  Spirit,  ye 
would  hear  and  receive  these  words.  This  explains  your  conduct. 
Ye  hear  not  my  words  because  j^e  are  not  in  harmony  with  God — 
with  his  Spirit  and  his  truth. 

48.  Then  answered  the  Jevrs,  and  said  unto  him,  Say  we 
not  well  that  thou  art  a  Samaritan,  and  hast  a  devil? 

Irked  and  stung  by  such  truth-telling,  heart-revealing  words,  they 
turn  again  upon  him  to  taunt  him  with  being  a  Samaritan — one 
of  the  most  odious  epithets  they  could  think  of — one  which  the 
Jews  customarily  applied  to  outcasts  from  their  people.  Perhaps 
they  had  some  allusion  to  the  fixct  that  Jesus  had  associated  with 

Samaritans  and  made  converts  from  among  them. They  also 

seek  to  vilify  him  and  break  the  force  of  every  thing  he  had  said, 
by  the  charge — (made  before  ;  John  7:  20):  "Thou  hast  a  devil." 
The  same  thing  appears  again  (John  10:  20):  "Many  of  them 
said — He  hath  a  devil  and  is  mad;  why  hear  ye  him?"  He  is 
only  a  maniac,  insane  ;  probably  thej^  meant  to  imply — not  morally 
responsible  for  the  incoherent,  irrational  words  he  utters.  At 
least,  they  meant — a  man  whose  words  were  of  not  the  least  ac- 
count, being  void  of  sense  and  truthfulness. As  above  (7  :  20) 

the  word  here  used  for  "devil"  is  not  diabolos  but  daimonion — 
demon ;  the  current  doctrine  of  the  age  being  that  these  demons 
entered  into  the  human  body,  and  displacing  the  rational  mind, 
took  possession — speaking  through  human  lips  and  controlling  all 
the  activities  of  the  man.  This  charge,  therefore,  so  far  as  it  was 
believed,  broke  the  moral  force  of  every  word  Jesus  might 
utter. Their  question  as  put  here — "  Say  we  not  well  that  thou 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VIIT.  145 

hast  a  devil?"  not  only  suggests  that  they  had  said  this  before, 
but  asounies  -with  unblushing  boldness  that  they  had  said  this 
"u-t'll" — with  good  reason;  on  valid  grounds.  How  could  the 
cool  impudence  and  the  moral  hardihood  of  the  basest  depravity 
go  farther? 

49.  JesiLS  answered,  I  Imve  not  a  devil;  but  I  Iionor  my 
Father,  and  ye  do  dislionor  me. 

50.  And  I  seek  not  mine  own  glory:  tlierc  is  one  tliat 
sceketh  and  judgeth. 

The  charge  of  being  a  Samaritan  Jesus  passes  unnoticed;  the 
other  charge — that  of  being  possessed  Avith  a  devil — he  meets  Avith 
a  square  denial.  It  was  too  vital  in  its  bearings,  not  to  be  re- 
pelled.  In  his  next  words  Jesus  seems  to  fall  back  upon  the 

convictions  of  his  deepest  consciousness; — I  kuoio  that  1  honor 
my  Father ;  I  kjiotv  that  the  words  I  have  spoken  and  the  deeds 
I  have  done  have  sprung  from  supreme  devotion  to  his  service  and 
glory.  They  might  blind  their  eyes  to  the  evidence  of  this;  the 
fact  lived  in  his  own  deep  consciousness — his  consolation  under 

the  keenest  reproaches ;  his  joy  under  the  bitterest  failures. 

I  honor  my  Father;  but  ye  give  me  only  dishonor,  scorn,  shame. 

The  thought  seems  to  be  suggested  by  the  conti-ast. 1  say  not 

this  because  I  selfishly  aspire  after  personal  glory :  It  is  not  be- 
cause it  smites  down  some  idol  in  my  heart  that  I  shrink  from  the 
scorn  ye  heap  on  me.  It  is  enough  for  me  that  my  Father  smiles 
his  approbation.  This  is  what  he  intimates — "  There  is  One  that 
seeketh"  my  glory  and  "judgeth"  between  me  and  my  vilifiers. 
I  can  well  aiford  to  await  his  judgment. 

51.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  If  a  man  keep  my 
saying,  he  shall  never  see  death. 

In  the  discourses  of  our  Lord  the  words — "  Verily,  verily," — 
always  imply  an  advance  to  some  new  point  of  special  impor- 
tance.  If  we  look  inquiringly  for  the  law  of  mental  associa- 
tion which  suggested  this  announcement,  may  we  not  find  it  in  this 
line  of  thought: — Ye  repel  my  words  Avith  scorn  and  bafile  my 
utmost  endeavors  to  lead  you  into  truth  and  back  to  God.  I  look 
with  unutterable  sorrow  upon  the  ruin  of  eternal  death  which  lies 
1>ut  one  step  before  you :  therefore  let  me  say  solemnly  and  ten- 
derly, one  word  more : — If  any  man  of  you  all  shall  keep  my 
saying — accept  my  doctrine  Avith  loA'ing  heart  and  abide  therein — 
"he  shall  never  see  death."  Such  a  connection  of  thought  does 
justice  to  the  love  of  his  heart  for  the  vilest;  to  his  compassion 
over  the  men  Avho  were  soon  to  become  his  murderers.  O,  hoAV 
gladly  Avould  he  have  plucked  even  one  soul  from  among  them  out 
of  the>open  jaAvs  of  death! 

52.  Then  said  the  Jews  unto  him,  Now  Ave  knoAv  that  thou 
hast  a  devil.    Abraham  is  dead,  and  the  i^rophcts;  and  thou 


146  GOSPEL   OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  YIII. 

sayest,  If  a,  man  keep  my  saying,  lie  shall  never  taste  of 
death. 

53.  Art  thou  greater  than  our  father  Abraham,  which  is 
dead  ?  and  the  prophets  are  dead :  whom  makest  thou  thy- 
self? 

More  un-willing  than  unable  to  take  in  the  high,  spiritual  sense 
of  these  words  of  Jesus,  they  seem  ghid  to  find  in  them  another 
proof  (as  they  would  pretend)  of  his  insanity — an  impostor  hold- 
ing forth  that  whoever  would  keep  his  saying  should  never  die ! 
"  What !  "  they  would  say  ;  Dost  thou  pretend  to  be  greater  than 
our  father  Abraham,  Avho  yet — good  man  as  he  was — had  to  die; 
and  all  the  prophets  met  deatli  in  their  time;  whom  dost  thou 
pretend  to  be  ? 

54.  Jesus  answered,  If  I  honor  myself,  my  honor  is  noth- 
ing :  it  is  my  Father  that  honoreth  me ;  of  whom  ye  say, 
that  he  is  your  God  : 

55.  Yet  ye  have  not  knoAvn  him ;  but  I  know  him  :  and 
if  I  should  say,  I  know  hira  not,  I  shall  be  a  liar  like  unto 
you  ;  but  I  know  him,  and  keep  his  saying. 

If  my  words  were  those  of  high,  fulsome,  vain  pretension,  tliey 
should  justly  go  for  nothing.  It  is  my  Father— not  myself — that 
honors  me.  Of  him  ye  say,  he  is  your  God.  •  (Would  there  were 
truth  in  3-our  claim — but  there  is  not ! )  Ye  have  not  known 
the  true  God  in  any  right  sense  at  all.  But  I  know  him ;  this 
I  must  maintain  as  the  cardinal  j^oint  in  my  testimony  before 
the  world.  I  know  God ;  be  is  my  Father ;  he  sent  me  from 
heaven  ;  I  come  to  bring  his  words  of  truth  and  mercy  to  jier- 
ishing  men.  If  I  should  say  Avith  you  that  I  know  him  not,  then  I 
should  belie  my  own  deepest  convictions,  and  should  be  a  liar 
like  yourselves. Thus  .Jesus  puts  the  great  issue  between  him- 
self and  these  hostile,  maligning  Jews. 

56.  Your  father  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see  my  day :  and  he 
saw  it,  and  was  glad. 

Your  father  Abraham,  all  unlike  yourselves,  appreciated  my 
work  ;  leaped  for  joy  that  he  might  "  see  my  day  " — not  my  per- 
son, which  would  have  been  a  yet  more  glorious  vision — but  my 
"  day ;  "  its  general  outline,  purpose,  work  and  results.  The 
knowledge  of  your  nation's  Messiah  which  ye  despise,  he  longed 
to  attain,  though  he  could  hope  for  it  only  in  an  inferior  meas- 
ure. He  did  attain  that  and  rejoiced  therein  with  great  joy.  So 
much  for  the  application  of  this  case  of  Abraham  to  rebuke  at 
once  their  contempt  of  him  and  their  self-conceited-  assumption 
of  being  the  children  of  Abraham. 

What  is  said  here  of  Abraham's  vision  of  Christ,  seems  to  im- 
ply two  distinct  stages:   first,  he  was  exhilarated  with  the  hope 


GOSPEL   OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  VIII.  147 

or  prospect  of  seeing  it;  next,  his  hopes  were  realized  in  at  least 

Bome  good  measure:  he  saw  and  exulted  with  joy. Were  these 

in  fact  two  distinct  stages  of  revelation  to  him — the  former  less 
full  and  the  latter  more  :  or  was  the  former  only  the  traditional 
views  of  the  far-future  Deliverer  which  came  down  from  the  first 
promise  made  to  Adam — somewhat  dimly  hinted  also  to  Noah  ? 

This  is  at  least  snpposa})lc,  and,  if  accepted,  would  seem  to 

show  how  good  men  in  those  times  were  animated  with  bright 
hopes  of  a  day  far  better  than  the  world  of  their  age  had  seen. 
Still  another  supposition  has  found  some  fiivor,  viz:  that  the 
second  stage  of  his  vision — "  he  saw  and  was  glad  " — was  not  of 
that  prophetic  sort  which  came  of  old  to  saints  yet  in  the  flesh  ; 
but  of  that  higher  sort  Avhich  saints  receive  in  glory — such  knowl- 
edge as  Moses  and  Elijah  may  have  rejoiced  in  before  they  met 
Jesus  on  the  mount  of  transfiguration,  and  which  may  have  sug- 
gested themes  for  that  wonderful  conversation. In    choosing 

between  these  two  theories,  it  should  be  considered  that  Abra- 
ham actually  had  successive  prophetic  visions,  and  certainly  vis- 
ions very  much  in  advance  of  Avhat  had  come  down  to  him  by 
tradition  from  the  fothers,  so  that  there  is  no  violence  to  known 
fiicts  in  the  supposition  that  the  "seeing"  and  "gladness"  per- 
tained to  his  latest  visions  in  the  flesh. Further,  the  suppo- 
sition of  a  reference  to  knowledge  reached  after  death  should 
not  be  accepted  without  some  real  demand  for  it,  inasmuch  as 
the  scriptures  are  not  wont  to  give  intimations  on  this  subject. 

57.  Then  said  the  Jews  unto  him,  Thou  art  not  yet  fifty 
years  old,  and  hast  thou  seen  Al^raham  ? 

llow  earnest  thou  to  know  so  much  about  Abraham  ?     Surely 

thou  hast  never  seen  him. The  reason  why  they  named  fifty 

years,  is  supposed  to  be  that  this  was  an  average  limit  to  hu- 
man life.     May  it  not  have  been  suggested  by  his  apjoarent  age : 

judging  from  your  appearance  you  must  be  short  of  fifty. 

The  prophet  Isaiah  said  of  him,  "  His  visage  was  so  marred 
more  than  any  man,  and  his  form  than  the  sons  of  men  "  (Isa. 
52:  14);  and  his  disciples  wei'e  reminded  on  one  occasion  of  the 
consuming  zeal  of  their  Master  for  which  they  found  expression 
in  words  of  scripture — "  The  zeal  of  thine  house  hath  eaten  me 
up"  (John  2:  17);  so  that  possibly  he  had  the  appearance  of  more 
years  than  he  had  actually  seen. 

58.  Jesus  said  unto  them.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you, 
Before  Abraham  was,  I  am. 

No  fair  construction  of  these  words  can  make  them  mean  less 
than  this  :  I  existed  before  Abraham  teas  born.  My  life  is  not 
to  be  limited  within  fifty  human  years.  Ye  have  no  just  views 
of  my  person  while  ye  restrict  my  existence  within  this  limi- 
tation. Long  before  Abraham  was  born  my  divine  person  was 
"  with  God" — the  I'cal  "I am,"  eternally  self-existent.     This  must 


148  GOSPEL   OF   JOHN.— CHAP.  IX. 

be  the  sense  of  these  ■words  of  Jesus.  Those  who  accept  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Logos  as  taught  in  John  1  :  1-14,  can  have  no  diffi- 
culty with  this  statement. 

59.  Then  took  they  up  stones  to  cast  at  him:  but  Jesus 
hid  himself,  and  "went  out  of  the  temple,  going  through  the 
midst  of  them,  and  so  passed  by. 

This  last  declaration  brought  the  conversation  to  its  crisis.  His 
adversaries,  in  a  frenzy  of  excitement,  began  to  gather  stones  to 
hurl  upon  him.  Jesus  suddenly  withdrew — and  so  this  scene 
closed. 

The  thoughtful  reader  of  this  chapter  must  be  impressed  with 
the  hopeless  moral  hardihood  of  these  captious  Jews.  The  efforts 
of  Jesus  to  convict  their  consciences  of  sin,  to  lead  them  into 
truth,  and  to  bring  them  to  a  docile,  honest  faith  in  himself,  were 
utterly  powerless  as  toward  these  results.  Every  fresh  point  in 
his  pi'ogressive  argument  only  maddened  them  the  more.  When 
they  reached  the  point  where  they  could  say,  "Thou  hast  a  devil," 
there  must  have  been,  it  would  seem,  an  end  of   hope  in  their 

case. We  have  no  further  occasion  to  wonder  that  they  rushed 

madly  on  to  plot  and  to  take  his  life ;  or  that  the  nation,  follow- 
ing such  religious  leaders,  waxed  more  and  more  corrupt,  infatu- 
ated and  desperate  in  guilt,  till  the  judgments  of  heaven  fell  on 
their  city  and  nation,  and  "  there  was  no  remedy." 


:>UKo 


CHAPTER    IX. 

This  chapter  has  unity,  presenting  one  event  and  one  only — ■ 
the  healing  of  a  man  born  blind,  with  the  discussion  which  it  oc- 
casioned. 

1.  And  as  Jesus  passed  by,  he  saw  a  man  which  was  blind 
from  his  birth. 

2.  And  his  disciples  asked  him,  saying.  Master,  who  did 
sin,  this  man  or  his  parents,  that  he  was  born  blind? 

3.  Jesus  answered,  Neither  hath  this  man  sinned,  nor  his 
parents :  but  that  the  works  of  God  should  be  made  mani- 
fest in  him. 

That  this  entire  scene  occurred  on  a  Sabbath  is  shown  in  v. 
14 ;  but  whether  on  the  same  day  with  the  discussion  recorded 
S:  12-59  is  in  dispute  among  commentators;  some  holding  it  to 
have  been  on  the  same  day;  others,  on  the  Sabbath  nest  suc- 
ceeding.  Accustomed  to  sit  near  the  temple  to  beg  his  living, 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  IX.  149 

tins  man  probably  pled  the  fact  of  having  been  born  blind.  This 
raised  the  question  among  the  disciples  whose  sin  was  punished 
in  this  case  of  congenital  blindness.*  AVas  it  the  sin  of  the  man 
himself,  or  the  sin  of  his  parents  ?  They  assumed  it  must  ])e 
somi'bodi/'a  sin.  How  could  it  be  for  his  sin  before  he  was  born: 
and  how  could  it  be  just  to  punish  him  for  the  sin  of  his  parents? 
Here  was  a  hard  problem.  They  bring  it  to  their  Master.  He 
answers — Neither  of  your  alternatives  meets  the  case.  This 
blindness  was  permitted  of  God  for  the  purpose  of  manifesting 
his  works  to  men. 

4.  I  must  work  tlie  works  of  him  that  sent  mc,  wliile  it 
is  day:  the  night  cometli,  when  no  man  can  work. 

5.  As  long  as  I  am  in  the  world,  I  am  the  light  of  the 
world. 

Manifestly  Jesus  thinks  of  such  tcorks  as  he  spake  of  in  John 
5:  17:  "My  Father  ivorkeih  hitherto,  and  I  work."  He  is  sent 
into  this  Avorld  to  do  such  works  of  mercy  as  those  done  by  the 
Father.     Now  another  occasion  occurring,  he  must  improve  it. 

"  While  it  is  day  " — the  time  for  work.     He   saw  that  his 

night  drew  near — a  night  of  no  more  ivork  here  and  now,  of  this 

sort. "I  am  the  light  of  the  world" — said  with  his  thought 

upon  the  opening  of  sightless  ej^es — first  in  the  physical  sense; 
then  in  the  far  higher  spiritual  sense  in  which  he  unseals  eyes 
blinded  by  life-long  sin. 

6.  When  he  had  thus  spoken,  he  spat  on  the  ground, 
and  made  clay  of  the  spittle,  and  he  anointed  the  eyes  of 
the  blind  man  with  the  clay, 

7.  And  said  unto  him.  Go,  wa.3h  in  the  pool  of  Siloam, 
(which  is  by  interpretation.  Sent.)  He  went  his  way,  there- 
fore, and  washed,  and  came  seeing. 

In  this  miracle,  the  things  required  of  the  blind  man  to  do  can 
not  be  supposed  to  have  had  the  least  natural  influence.  Neither 
the  saliva,  the  clay,  or  the  washing,  could  have  had  any  agency 
or  virtue  in  giving  vision  to  eyes  that  had  never  seen.  The  obe- 
dience and  the  f\iith  which  it  implied  were  no  doubt  conditions  in 
the  spiritual  realm,  without  which  Jesus  Avould  not  have  wrought 

the  miracle. We  may  notice  in  the  miracles  wrought  by  Jesus 

a  wide  range  of  diversity  in  the  method  of  operation — the  manner 
and  the  circumstances;  and  the  antecedent  conditions.  All  the 
reasons  for  this  diversity  we  may  not  be  sure  of  discerning;  some 
of  them  we  can  probably  understand.     One  stereotyped  method 

■■•■  The  precise  import  of  their  question  is — Who  did  sin,  this  man 
or  his  parents,  that,  as  a  punishment,  he  must  needs  be  born  blind? 
They  assumed  it  to  be  a  necessity  under  the  moral  connection  be- 
tween siu  and  suffering. 


150  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAR  IX. 

would  have  greatly  lessened  their  moral  poAver  as  miracles.  Di- 
versity augments  their  moral  force.  It  goes  strongly  against  any 
supposition  of  collusion  or  deception.  Moreover,  Jesus  seems  in 
most  cases  to  have  had  an  eye  to  a  good  moral  impression  upon 
the  subject  of  the  miracle  or  his  friends. 

The  pool  of  Siloam  Avas  in  the  south-east  part  of  the  city — a 
beautiful  fountain  of  pure  and  sweet  water.  The  word  SiJoam 
came  from  a  Hebrew  root,  having  the  meaning,  "sent."  Xo 
other  reason  appears  for  this  allusion  to  the  meaning  of  the  name 
except  the  coincidence  between  this  command  and  this  signifi- 
cance.  The   blind   beggar  obeyed   promptly   and   came   back 

seeing. 

8.  The  neighbors  therefore,  find  they  ■which  before  had 
seen  him  that  he  was  blind,  said,  Is  not  this  he  that  sat  and 
begged  ? 

9.  Some  said.  This  is  he:  others  said,  Tie  is  like  him:  but 
he  said,  I  am  lie. 

10.  Therefore  said  they  unto  him,  Hoav  were  thine  eyes 
opened  ? 

11.  He  answered  and  said,  A  man  that  is  called  Jesus 
made  clay  and  anointed  mine  eyes,  and  said  unto  me.  Go  to 
the  pool  of  Siloam,  and  wash :  and  I  went  and  washed,  and 
I  received  sight. 

12.  Then  said  they  unto  him,  Where  is  he?  He  said,  I 
know  not. 

This  story  tells  with  great  simplicity  the  surprise,  the  inquiries, 
and  the  circumstances  of  the  case  as  developed  among  the  neigh- 
bors and  those  who  had  known  him  from  birth.  It  appears  that 
Jesus  performed  this  miracle  with  no  pains  to  make  himself 
known,  and  then  disappeared ;  so  that  when  this  blind  man  came 
back  with  seeing  eyes,  Jesus  had  gone,  he  knew  not  whither. 

13.  They  brought  to  the  Pharisees  him  that  aforetime 
was  blind. 

14.  And  it  was  the  sabbath  day  when  Jesus  made  the 
clay,  and  opened  his  eyes. 

15.  Then  again  the  Pharisees  also  asked  him  how  he  had 
received  bis  sight.  He  said  unto  them,  He  put  clay  upon 
mine  eyes,  and  I  washed,  and  do  see. 

16.  Therefore  said  some  of  the  Pharisees,  This  man  is  not 
of  God,  because  he  keepeth  not  the  sabbath  day.  Others 
said.  How  can  a  man  that  is  a  sinner  do  such  miracles. 
And  there  was  a  division  among  them. 

They  bring  the  restored  man  and  his  case  before  the  Pharisees. 
An  important  fact  in  the  case  comes  to  light  here; — It  was  done 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  IX.  151 

on  the  Sahhalh.  Jesus  could  not  have  forgotten  the  fierce  perse- 
cution he  had  suffered  once  before  for  jicrforming  a  similar  miracle 
on  the  Sabbath  (John  5),  yet  he  seems  to  have  taken  no  pains 
to  avoid  exciting  like  prejudice  and  persecution  again.  He  was 
right  in  performing  works  of  mercy  and  power  on  the  Sabbath, 
and  he  purposed  to  maintain  his  position,  with  no  parade  and 

no  needless  provocation,  yet  with  firmness  and  decision. The 

Pharisees  examine  the  man,  demanding  and  receiving  his  straight- 
forward account  of  his  restoration  to  sight.  Some  of  them  at 
once  prejudged  Jesus:  he  could  not  be  a  man  of  God  because  he 
did  not  keep  the  Sabbath — according  to  their  notions.  And 
they  were  entirely  too  bigoted  to  allow  the  thought  that  possibly 
their  notions  of  Sabbath-keeping  were  not  of  God.  Some  among 
them  said  very  sensibly — "How  can  a  man  that  is  a  sinner  draw 
upon  the  Almighty  for  power  to  work  such  a  miracle?"  "If 
I  regard  iniquity  in  my  heart,  the  Lord  will  not  hear  me" — 
makes  an  appeal  to  the  good  sense  of  men  which  no  candid  mind 
can  resist. 

17.  They  .say  unto  the  blind  man  again,  What  sayest  thou 
of  him,  that  he  hath  opened  thine  eyes?  He  said,  He  is  a 
])rophet. 

Very  appi'opriately  they  ask  him  of  restored  sight  what  he 
thinks  of  the  man  who  gave  him  eyes  to  see.  His  good  sense 
answered  promptly — "  He  is  a  prophet."  He  remembered  that 
his  Old  Testament  scriptures  spake  of   miracles  somewhat  like 

this,  done  by  the  Lord's  ancient  prophets. This  man  appears 

throughout  the  narrative  to  have  had  excellent  good  sense,  and 
withal  firmness  and  independence  of  character,  worthy  of  high 
commendation.  He  has  a  much  better  record  than  the  man 
healed  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda  on  that  other  Sabbath. 

18.  But  the  Jews  did  not  believe  concerning  him,  that 
he  had  been  blind,  and  received  his  sight,  until  they  called 
the  parents  of  him  that  had  received  his  sight. 

19.  And  they  asked  them,  saying,  Is  this  your  son,  who 
ye  say  was  born  blind  ?  How  then  doth  he  now  see  ? 

20.  His  parents  answered  them  and  said,  "We  know  that 
this  is  our  son,  and  that  he  was  born  blind : 

21.  But  by  what  means  he  now  seeth,  we  know  not;  or 
who  hath  opened  his  eyes,  w^e  know  not:  he  is  of  age;  ask 
him :  he  shall  speak  for  himself. 

22.  These  words  spake  his  parents,  because  they  feared 
the  Jews :  for  the  Jews  had  agreed  already,  that  if  any  man 
did  confess  that  he  was  Christ,  he  should  be  put  out  of  the 
synagogue. 

23.  Therefore  .said  his  parents,  He  is  of  age;  ask  him. 


152  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  IX. 

AVe  can  have  no  great  respect  for  Incredulity  so  unreasonable 
and  so  manifestly  begotten  of  prejudice  and  hate;  yet  in  this  case 
it  powerfully  subserved  the  interests  of  truth.  They  happened 
to  live  just  when  stubborn  skepticism,  no  matter  how  wicked,  un- 
reasonable and  gratuitous,  would  yet  turn  to  most  excellent  account 
for  all  future  time.  The  skeptics  of  all  after  ages  might  afford  to 
thank  these  unbelieving  Jews  for  sifting  the  evidence  of  this  mi- 
racle and  rejecting  every  thing  short  of  moral  demonstration. 

They  must  have  the  identity  of  this  man  proved  by  the  testimony 
of  the  father  who  begat  him  and  of  the  mother  who  bare  him.  Very 
well.  We  may  be  glad  they  demanded  this  testimony — and  got 
it.     They  did  not  like  to  be  satisfied  with  even  this  testimony ; 

but  really  they  could  doubt  that  point  no  longer. The  parents 

were  timidly  afraid  of  losing  caste  with  the  Jewish  authorities, 
and  seem  not  to  have  been  much  affected  with  gratitude  to  the 
stranger  for  the  great  blessing  he  had  brought  to  their  son. 

24.  Then  again  called  they  the  man  that  was  blind,  and 
said  unto  him,  Give  God  the  praise :  we  know  that  this  man 
is  a  sinner. 

"Give  God  the  praise,"  coming  from  their  lips,  meant — Do  not 
give  the  praise  to  this  man  who  is  a  sinner.  We  know  this  man 
to  be  a  sinner  because,  according  to  our  notions  of  the  day,  he 
breaks  the  Sabbath.  Of  course  they  know  that  their  notions  arc 
right.  Men  supremely  bigoted  always  know  this.  Hoio  this 
wicked  man  could  work  such  a  miracle,  they  perhaps  tried  to 
think  was  no  concern  of  theirs.  It  seemed  a  very  religious  way 
to  dispose  of  this  case,  to  tell  the  restored. man  to  give  the  praise 

to  God. A  slightly   different  view   of   their  meaning   in  the 

words — "Give  glory  to  God,"  is  at  least  sujiposable,  viz.  that  they 
used  them  as  Joshua  used  similar  words  to  Achan  (Josh.  7:  19); 
Honor  the  Omniscient  God  by  confessing  your  sin;  telling  the 
whole  truth ;  acknowledging  that   such  a   sinner  as  Jesus  never 

could  have  wrought  this  miracle  as  you  say. This  construction 

supposes  them  to  have  been  supremely  bigoted  and  overbearing — 
as  thejr  actually  were. 

25.  He  answered  and  said,  Whether  he  he  a  sinner  or  no, 
I  know  not :  one  thing  I  know,  that,  whereas  I  was  blind, 
now  I  see. 

This  restored  man  knows  nothing  of  the  antecedents  of  his  ben- 
efactor ;  does  not  at  this  stage  of  the  discussion  claim  to  be  pro- 
found (as  they  claim  to  be)  in  his  pihilosophy  as  to  the  miracle- 
working  power  of  a  sinner  j  and  does  not  feel  called  upon  (just 
now)  to  advance  any  opinion  on  that  point.  But  as  to  the  fact 
of  having  been  honestly  blind  all  his  previous  life  and  of  now 
seeing,  he  is  ready  to  testify.  So  much  he  knou-s,  and  no  brow- 
beating shall  stop  his  mouth  to  the  effect  of  shutting  off  this  tes- 
timony.  All  the  world  (unless  those  bigoted  Jews  be  an  exccp- 


GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  IX.  153 

tion)  have  admired  his  ,c;rit,  his  honest  love  of  truth,  and  his  fear- 
lessness in  maintaining  it. 

26.  Then  said  they  to  him  again,  "What  did  he  to  thee? 
how  opened  he  thine  eyes? 

27.  He  answered  them,  I  liave  told  you  already,  and  ye 
did  not  hear:  wherefore  Avould  ye  hear  it  again?  will  ye  al.-;o 
be  his  disciples? 

28.  Then  they  reviled  liim,  and  said,  Thou  art  his  disci- 
ple ;  but  we  are  INIoses'  disciples. 

29.  We  know  that  God  spake  unto  Moses:  as  for  tJiis  fel- 
low, we  know  not  from  whence  he  is. 

Oh,  if  they  could  only  find  some  flaw  in  this  testimony — if  they 
could  only  ijet  over  this  great  solid  fact,  looking  them  so  calmly, 
yet  uncomfortably  in  the  foce !  Is  there  not  some  way  to  explain 
it  without  admitting  miraculous  power?  This  pinch  has  troubled 
many  thousand  skeptics  from  that  day  to  this.  It  is  a  comfort  to 
all  honest,  truth-loving  souls  to  see  that  the  battle  with  skepticism 
as  to  the  facts  of  the  case  was  fought  out  bravely  while  the  scenes 
were  all  yet  fresh,  the  original  Avitnesses  living,  and  fortunately, 

the  very  parties  in  the  fight. It  is  not  perhaps  strange  that  this 

honest-hearted  man  who  had  told  the  story  over  quite  a  good  many 
times — in  the  same  way,  to  the  same  2:)urport  every  time — should 
have  his  patience  a  little  tried  by  the  strain  brought  upon  it. 
Perhaps  it  seemed  to  him  to  reflect  somewhat  upon  his  veracity. 
1  have  told  you  all  about  it  once  and  again,  and  ye  did  not  hear; 
ye  seem  not  to  accept  and  believe  what  I  said  :  why  should  ye 
Avish  to  hear  it  over  again?  Do  ye  think  of  becoming  his  disci- 
ples ? This  last  word  was  perhaps  a   little  sharp.     They  felt 

insulted,  and  retorted  with  reviling. It  is  j^erhaps  supposable 

that  the  question — ^Do  ye  wish  to  become  his  disciples  ?  was  put 
in  good  faith,  in  this  sense  : — Are  ye  pushing  these  inquiries  in 
the  spirit  of  an  honest  regai-d  for  truth,  prepared,  if  ye  find  the 
evidence  satisfactory,  to  admit  his  mission  from  God,  and  place 
yourselves  at  his  feet  as  disciples?  If  so,  his  position  was  no- 
ble ;  his  regard  for  truth,  sublime. Their  claim  to  be  disciples 

of  Moses  had  an  eye  to  their  sanctimonious  regard  for  the  oab- 
bath-law  which  came  to  them  through  Moses.  Moses  was  a  good 
man;  they  know  that.  It  can  not  be  wrong,  they  think,  to  stand 
up  for  Moses  and  his  Sabbath-law  ;  but  as  for  this  man,  they  can 
not  speak  of  him  with  too  much  scorn.  They  neither  know  or 
wish  to  know  any  thing  of  him. 

80.  The  man  answered  and  said  unto  them.  Why  herein 
is  a  marvelous  thing,  that  ye  know  not  from  whence  he  is, 
and  yet  he  hath  opened  mine  eyes. 

31.  Now  we  know  that  God  heareth  not  sinners:  but  if 
any  man  be  a  Avorshiper  of  God,  and  doeth  his  will,  him  he 
heareth. 


154  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  IX. 

32.  Since  the  world  began  was  it  not  heard  that  any  man 
opened  the  eyes  of  one  that  "was  born  blind. 

33.  If  this  mail  Avere  not  of  God,  he  could  do  nothing. 

The  restored  man  waxes  bold,  and  plies  the  logic  of  his  strong 
common  sense  vigorously.  What  shall  be  thought  of  it,  for*  here 
is  a  strange  fact — that  ye  should  not  know  whence  this  man  is, 
and  yet  he  hath  opened  my  eyes !  How  happens  it  that  ye 
should  know  nothing  of  a  man  possessed  of  such  powers.  This 
ignorance  is  not  much  to  your  credit.  But  look  ye  into  the  nature 
of  this  case.  It  is  entirely  certain  that  God  does  not  hear  the 
prayer  of  sinners;  but  if  one  be  a  worshiper  of  God  and  a  doer 
of  his  will,  God  will  hear  his  prayer,  and  may  help  him  work  a 
miracle.  The  man  who  gave  me  eyes  vnist  have  had  help  from 
God.  There  is  no  weak  spot  in  this  reasoning.  No  mere  man, 
unaided  of  God,  has  ever  since  the  world  began,  opened  eyes  born 
sightless.  If  this  man  were  not  of  God,  he  would  be  utterly  pow- 
erless for  such  a  miracle. 

34.  They  answered  and  said  unto  him,  Thou  wast  alto- 
gether born  in  sins,  and  dost  thou  teach  us  ?  And  they  cast 
him  out. 

Bigotry  had  swamped  their  common  sense — not  to  say  also 
common  honesty.  Having  never  a  word  to  ansAver  to  this  logic 
or  to  the  facts  and  principles  that  were  underlying  it,  they  throw 
it  in  this  man's  face  that  his  eyeless  birth  proved  him  a  worthless 
sinnei',  not  fit  to  be  regarded  by  such  holy  men  as  themselves. 
They  put  themselves  upon  their  dignity  as  not  to  be  taught  by  such 

a  sinner — and  cast  him  out  of  tlie  synagogue  ! Did  they  feel 

easier  in  conscience  after  this  ?  Such  men  make  but  the  least 
possible  account  of  conscience.  It  was  perhaps  a  momentary  re- 
lief to  get  out  of  their  way  a  man  whose  testimony  to  facta  was 
so  very  annoying,  and  whose  honest  reasoning  upon  those  facts 
it  Avas  so  impossible  for  them  to  meet. 

35.  Jesus  heard  that  they  had  cast  him  out;  andAvhen  he 
had  found  him,  he  said  unto  him,  Dost  thou  believe  on  the 
Son  of  God  ? 

36.  He  ansAvered  and  said.  Who  is  he,  Lord,  that  I  might 
believe  on  him? 

37.  And  Jesus  said  unto  him,  Thou  hast  both  seen  him, 
and  it  is  he  that  talketh  Avith  thee. 

••■  Greek  writers  sometimes  begin  a  sentence  witli  yap  (for),  leaving 
some  brief  expression  to  be  supplied,  as  here ;  AVbat  shall  I  make  of 
this— /or  it  is  indeed  wonderful  that  ye — such  men  as  ye  are — who 
,  ought  to  know  all  the  eminently  great  and  good  men  of  your  time 
should  not  know  a  man  so  good  and  so  great  as  to  be  able  to  open 
eyes  thnt  never  saw  before! 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CILVr.  IX.  155 

38.  And  lie  said,  Lord,  I  believe.    And  lie  worshiped  liim. 

A  charming  sequel.  The  man  who  had  borne  himself  so  nobly 
need  not  be  cast  down  in  spirit — for  Jesus  is  near  and  will  give 
him  his  own  sympathy.  A  mind  so  honest,  a  spirit  so  brave  ior 
the  truth  and  so  candid,  is  not  far  from  the  kingdom  of  God. 
Jesus  soon  found  him — found  him  ready  to  inquire — "  Who  is 
the  Son  of  God  that  1  may  believe  on  him?"  and  to  say — "Lord, 
I  believe." yVe  hear  of  this  man  no  more. 

39.  And  Jesus  said,  For  judgment  I  am  come  into  tlii.s 
Avorld,  that  they  Avhich  see  not  might  see ;  and  that  they 
which  see  might  be  made  blind. 

The  case  suggested  to  Jesus  this  comprehensive  remark  as  to 
the  moral  results  of  his  mission  to  this  -world — that  the  not-see- 
ing (like  this  man  blind  from  birth)  might  have  sight  restored  : 
and  that  men,  blessed  Avith  all  needful  vision  but  abusing  their 
Idessings,  should  be  judicially  blinded.  Naturally  the  blind 
man's  case  became  suggestive  of  what  takes  place  in  the  moral 
realm  of  human  hearts  and  consciences  under  the  light  of  re- 
vealed truth  : — one  class — long  sitting  in  moral  darkness — 
brought  forth  into  light :  another  class,  favored  above  others  with 
the  light-bearing  word  of  God,  yet  resisting  its  demands,  and 
blinding  their  eyes  to  its  pure  teachings,  are  doomed  in  judgment 
to  the  blindness  they  have  cherished,  and  are  given  over  to  their 
own  chosen  infatuation.  The  world  is  full  of  cases  illustrating 
this  contrast.  For  such  judgment  has  Jesus  come  into  this 
Avorld ;  such  are  everj^-where  the  fruits  of  his  coming. 

40.  And  some  of  the  Pharisees  which  were  with  him  heard 
these  words,  and  said  unto  him,  Are  we  blind  also? 

41.  Jesus  said  unto  them,  If  ye  were  blind,  ye  should 
have  no  sin:  but  now  ye  say.  We  see;  therefore  your  sin 
remaineth. 

Some  of  the  Pharisees,  hearing  this  remark,  said — Dost  thou 
mean  that  for  us  ?  Wouldest  thou  insult  us  by  the  insinuation 
that  we  are  blind  ? — Jesus  answers  :  If  ye  were  really  blind,  hav- 
ing no  knowledge  of  God  and  duty,  ye  would  have  no  sin:  but 
now  that  ye  say,  We  see ; — now  that  in  fact  ye  have  had  ample 
means  of  moral  light,  and  might  have  been  wise  unto  salvation, 
your  sin  abides — is  upon  j'ou  and  is  to  be,  forever  !  "  Ye  knew 
your  duty,  but  ye  did  it  not."  No  other  form  of  sin  is  so  surely 
damning!  What  can  save  those  men  -whom  all  the  light  and 
truth  of  God  fail  to  save,  and  serve  only  to  hcisrhten  and  aggra- 
vate  their  guilt  r 


156  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  X. 


CHAPTER   X. 

This  chapter  is  closely  related  in  ihoiigJit  and  in  time  to  the 
two  preceding.  It  seems  to  have  been  suggested  by  the  case  of 
the  Pharisees — then  the  recognized  spiritual  leaders  of  the  cove- 
nant people,  but  altogether  apostate  from  God — blind  leaders  of 
blind  men.  To  the  fold  of  God's  people  they  were  as  thieves  and 
robbers  Avho  get  in  by  scaling  the  walls,  "  climbing  up  some 
other  way."     They  did  not  enter  legitimately  through  the  door. 

This  line  of  thought  led  Jesus  to  speak  of  himself  as  the  door 

of  the  sheep-fold — a  figure  which  to  a  considerable  extent  obtains 
throudi  Ys.  1-10.  The  conception  of  Jesus  as  also  "  the  Sliep- 
herd'  appears  in  vs.  2-5,  but  especially  in  vs.  11-18,  and  26-30. 
The  resulting  division  of  sentiment  among  his  hearers  comes  to 
view  (vs.  19-21).  This  discussion  seems  to  have  been  resumed 
at  the  subsequent  feast  of  dedication  (v.  22  and  onward).  In 
this  discussion  the  words  of  Jesus — "  I  and  the  Father  are  one  " 
— revived  the  chai'ge  of  blasphemy,  under  which  they  again  at- 
tempt to  stone  him.  Jesus  defends  his  declaration — I  am  the 
Son  of  God — from  the  Old  Testament  scriptures  (vs.  34-36),  and 
appeals  again  to  his  miracles  (vs.  37,  38);  escapes  a  violent  ar- 
rest, and  repairs  to  the  locality  where  John  at  first  baptized  (vs. 
39-42). 

1.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  He  that  enteretli  not  by 
tlie  door  into  the  sheep-fold,  but  climbeth  up  some  other  way, 
the  same  is  a  thief  and  a  robber. 

2.  But  he  that  entereth  in  by  the  door  is  the  shepherd  of 
■  the  sheej). 

In  studjdng  the  figurative  imagery  with  which  this  chapter 
opens;  the  door  oi  the  sheep-fold;  the  porter;  the  shepherd; 
the  thieves  and  robbers ; — it  is  wise  to  seek  in  a  docile  spirit  for 
the  real  meaning  of  Christ's  words,  and  to  guard  ourselves 
against  being  hypercritical  in  demanding  congruity  of  figure 
throughout.  What  if  the  figurative  conception  should  change — 
first  presenting  Jesus  as  the  door ;  and  aftei'ward  as  the  "  Shep- 
herd "  ?  The  sense  is  still  clear.  In  some  aspects  he  is  the 
door;   in  others,  the  shepherd. 

A  sheep-fold  is  an  inclosure,  with  Avails  and  a  door.  The  owner 
is  supposed  to  employ  and  control  the  porter,  and  also,  the  shep- 
herd ;  or  perhaps,  as  in  the  application  of  the  figure  here, 
he  may  fill  all  these  offices  himself.  He  is  lord  of  the  fold  and 
of  the  flock ;  and  of  course  has  command  of  the  door  of  en- 
trance.  "  Thieves  and  robbers  "  scale  the  walls;  get  in  as  they 

can,  "  some  other  way."  By  this  they  may  be  known.  Of  course 
they  have  no  rights  there ;   and  none  but  bad  intentions. 

3.  To  him  the  porter  openeth  ;  and  the  sheep  hear  his 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  X.  157 

voice:  and  lie  callcth  liis  own  sheep  by  name,  and  leadeth 
them  out. 

4.  And  when  he  putteth  fortli  his  own  sheep,  he  goeth 
before  them,  and  the  sheep  follow  him :  for  they  know  his' 
voice. 

5.  And  a  stranger  will  they  not  follow,  but  will  flee  from 
him  ;  for  they  know  not  the  voice  of  strangers. 

6.  This  paraljle  spake  Jesus  unto  tliem ;  but  they  under- 
stood not  what  things  they  ■were  which  he  spake  unto  them. 

The  porter  opens  the  door  to  the  real  shepherd;  the  sheep 
hear  his  call,  recognize  his  voice.  "He  calleth  them  hy  na7ne" 
— a  remarkable  fact  in  Oriental  husbandry,  that  in  a  flock  of 
hundreds  or  thousands,  each  individual  sheep  has  its  name; 
knows  it,  and  is  known  by  it.  So  Christ's  sheep  are  never  so 
numerous  that  he  will  not  know  each  one's  individual  name — 
each  one's  peculiarities,  personal  character,  talents,  fitnesses, 
weak  and  temptible  points,  exposures  and  demands  for  his  sym- 
pathy and  care.  A  positive  personal  communion  of  mind, 
thought,  sympathy,  and  love,  is  constantly  active  between  Jesus 
the  Shepherd  and  every  one  of  his  sheep.  They  severally  know 
him  ;  he  personally  knows  each  one  of  them.  He  can  call  each 
one  by  name,  and  lead  him  out  from  the  fold  into  the  pasture 
grounds  that  will  best  meet  his  wants. 

"  When  he  putteth  forth  all  his  own  "  (so  the  most  approved 
text  reads),  "  he  goeth  before  them,  and  the  sheep  follow  him  ;  for 
they  know  his  voice" — the  usages  of  shepherd  life  being  in  every 
point  applicable  most  beautifully  to  the  spiritual  nurture  and 
care  of  his  people  as  exercised  by  Jesus  their  Shepherd.  As 
sheep  will  not  follow  a  stranger  whose  voice  is  unfamiliar,  the 
people  of  Christ  may  learn  to  know  the  voice  of  their  good  Shep- 
hei'd,  so  as,  with  quick  and  sure  perception,  to  detect  every 
strange  voice  and  refuse  to  follow  it.  How  well  for  them  to  make 
and  maintain  tliis  definite  personal  acquaintance  with  Chi-ist,  so 

that  they  surely  know  his  from  every  misleading  voice  ! These 

words  of  Jesus  give  us  the  true  theory  of  the  Christian  life. 
Let  it  be  ours  to  reduce  this  theory  into  our  living  and  undevia- 

ting   practice. This   "  parable,'^ — not   precisely  in  the    same 

sense  as  this  English  word  has  in  the  other  evangelists — nor  is 
John's  Greek  word  the  same  as  theirs.  John's  word  means  only 
in  general  a  figurative  illustration — as  may  be  seen  also  in  16  : 
25,  29.  v.  6  raises  the  question — To  ivliom  was  this  parable  spo- 
ken ?  Who  did  not  understand  it  ?  Is  this  said  of  his  own  peo- 
ple, or  of  the  Jews  ?  Probably  the  latter,  as  we  might  infer  from 
V.  19,  and  as  might  be  inferred  also  from  its  having  been  appar- 
ently suggested  (as  above  said)  by  the  case  of  the  apostate  Phari- 
sees, breaking  into  God's  fold  and  acting  the  thief  and  the  rob- 
ber.    It  is  not  specially  strange  that  they  did  not  readily  under- 


158  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  X. 

stand  an  illustration  which  bore  with  just  severity  against  them- 
selves and  cut  so  deep  into  their  self-conceit. 

7.  Then  said  Jesus  unto  them  again,  Verily,  verily,  I  say 
unto  you,  I  am  the  door  of  the  sheep. 

8.  All  that  ever  came  before  me  are  thieves  and  robbers ; 
but  the  sheej)  did  not  hear  them. 

As  they  did  not  take  his  meaning  readilj',  he  proceeds  to  speak 
yet  more  plainly.  Commencing  vs'ith  his  emphatic  "Verily,  ver- 
ily," he  declares,  "  1  am  the  door  of  the  sheep."  1  own  this 
fold ;  I  keep  the  door  and  have  the  care  of  this  flock.  "All  that 
ever  came  before  me" — e.  g.  Satan  scaling  the  walls  of  the  gar- 
den of  Eden ;    and  all  his  servants  from  that  time  to  this — are 

thieves  and  robbers. There  is  no  need  to  press  these  words, 

'All  that  ever  came  before  me,"  so  as  to  include  the  patriarchs 
and  prophets — Abraham,  Moses,  David,  Isaiah — whom  God  cer- 
tainly used  as  his  own  shepherds  in  their  time  and  sphere.  His 
thought  is  not  upon  them,  but  first  (it  would  seem)  upon  Satan 
himself,  and  thence  onward  upon  all  his  instruments  and  helpers. 

"The  sheep  did  not  hear  them"  states  the  general  fact;  or, 

as  hinted  above,  the  theory  of  the  Christian  life,  under  which 
Christ's  people  are  to  know  and  follow  his  voice,  and  neither 
know  nor  follow  the  voice  of  strangers. 

9.  I  am  the  door:  by  me  if  any  man  enter  in,  he  shall  be 
saved,  and  shall  go  in  and  out,  and  find  pasture. 

10.  The  thief  cometh  not,  but  for  to  steal,  and  to  kill,  and 
to  destroy:  I  am  come  that  they  might  have  life,  and  that 
they  might  have  it  more  abundantly. 

The  striking,  not  to  say  interesting  thing  in  these  verses,  is 
the  facility  with  which  the  speaker  passes  from  figurative  to  lit- 
eral terms.  Here  is  a  sheep-fold  with  its  "  dooi\"  The  door  is 
Jesus  himself.  It  is  a  "  man  "  who  enters  in  through  this  door; 
and  so  entering,  he  is  "  saved  "  as  the  souls  of  men  are  saved  ; 
yet  the  figure  returns  again.  He  "goes  in  and  out"  of  this 
sheep-fold  as  sheep  are  wont  to  do,  night  and  morning,  and  he 
"finds  pasture" — such  grass  as  is  good  for  sheep.  But  no  reader 
need  miss  the  sentiment — at  once  beautiful  and  forcible — the 
Christian  soul  lives  on  Christ;  is  fed  and  guarded,  kept  and  made 
peaceful,  safe  and  quiet  as  the  trustful  lambs  under  the  faithful 

care  of  their  kind  shepherd. All  unlike  the  good  shepherd  and 

the  faithful  door-keeper  comes  the  thief  into  the  fold,  with  no 
object  but  to  steal,  kill,  and  destroy;  reckless  of  the  shepherd's 
rights  of  property — reckless  of  the  comfort  and  even  of  the  life  of 

the  sheep. "What  is  he  but  an  enemy — a  destroyer! The  case 

suggests  how  sorely  Jesus  must  have  been  tried,  grieved  and  fired 
with  indignation  against  the  Pharisees  who  had  climbed  into  his 
sheep-fuld  only  to  steal  and  to  kill,  murdering  human  souls  in- 


GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  X.  159 

PtCiid  of  loading  them  into  paths  of  life! Jesns  puts  his  own 

purpose  and  Avork  in  the  sharpest  contrast  with  theirs:  "T  lun 
come  tliat  they  may  have  life  "  and  may  live  well — with  a  life  at 
once  healthful,  vigorous,  endurini;!;  and  full  of  joy.  How  express- 
ive are  these  blessed  words  !  Ilow  full  of  truth  is  the  spiritual 
reality  which  they  represent ! 

11.  I  am  the  good  slieplierd :  tlie  good  yheplierd  givetli 
liis  life  for  the  sheep. 

12.  But  he  that  is  a  hireling,  and  not  the  shepherd,  whose 
own  the  sheep  are  not,  seeth  the  wolf  coming,  and  leaveth 
the  sheep,  and  fleeth ;  and  the  wolf  catcheth  them,  and  scat- 
tereth  the  sheep. 

13.  The  hireling  fleeth,  because  he  is  a  hireling,  and 
careth  not  for  the  sheep. 

These  exquisitely  precious  words — "  I  am  the  good  shepherd  " 
— lead  our  thought  first  to  the  admirable  fitness  of  the  figure,  con- 
sidered as  originating  in  Oriental  lands,  based  on  the  charming 
relations  as  there  seen  of  the  shepherd  to  his  flock,  in  Avhich  we 
have  care  and  sympathy  on  the  one  side,  met  with  never  falter- 
ing trust  and  never  flagging  obedience  on  the  other — begetting 
fellowship  and  companionship  never  to  be  intermitted  by  day  or 
liy  night,  in  summer  or  in  winter,  in  sunshine  or  in  storm — the 
relations  of  want  and  supply  reaching  to  food  and  to  shelter,  to 
help  in  weakness,  to  succor  in  trouble,  to  protection  against  ene- 
mies— indeed  to  every  possible  aid  which  interest  can  prompt  or 
affection  demand.  The  people  of  Christ  have  found  comfort  and 
quickening  in  this  similitude — Christ  the  good  shepherd,  and 
themselves  the  sheep  of  his  fold — ever  since  David  embalmed  his 
Christian  experience  in  his  sweet  twenty-third  psalm:  "The  Lord 
is  my  shepherd  ;  I  shall  not  want." 

But  further:  these  words  of  Jesus  should  carry  us  back  to  those 
prophetic  scrijitures  which  had  jiut  the  Messiah  in  contrast  with 
the  false  and  vile  shepherds  who  had  assumed  to  control  the  flock 
of  God,  but,  in  fact,  only  to  make  it  waste  and  desolate.  Such 
contrast  is  rather  implied  than  distinctly  expressed  in  Isa.  40: 
11:"  He  shall  feed  his  flock  like  a  shepherd  ;  he  shall  gather  the 
lambs  with  his  arm  and  carry  them  in  his  bosom,  and  shall  gently 
lead  those  that  are  Avith  j^oung."  The  description  is  beautiful ; 
tiie  tenderness  and  sympathy  inimitably  fine,  and  to  all  suffering 

Christian  souls,  full  of  hope  and  consolation. In  Ezek.  34,  we 

have  no  lack  of  strong  points  of  contrast,  such  as  give  force  to  the 
words — "  I  am  the  good  shepherd  " — the  well  known  shepherd  of 
j^our  prophetic  scriptures  whose  mission  was  specially  promised ; 
whose  work  was  put  in  sharp  contrast  even  there  with  the  evil 
shepherds  Avho  served  none  but  themselves,  and  only  cursed  the 

flock. "  Son  of  man,  prophesy  against  the  shepherds  of  Israel; 

Woe  be  to  the  shepherds  of  Israel  that  do  feed  themselves !  Ye 
cat  the  fat  and  ye  clothe  you  with  the  wool;  ye  kill  them  that 


IGO  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  X. 

are  fed;  but  ye  feed  not  the  flock."  Therefore  God  arises  in 
majesty  for  the  relief  of  his  flock  and  for  retribution  on  their  des- 
troyers, saying:  "  Therefore  will  I  save  my  flock,  and  they  shall 
no  more  be  a  prey.  .  .  And  I  will  set  up  one  shepherd  over 
them,  and  he  shall  feed  them,  even  my  servant  David  :  he  shall 
feed  them,  and  he  shall  be  their  shepherd ;  and  I  the  Lord  will 
be  their  God,  and  my  servant  David  a  prince  among  them ;  I  the 

Lord  have  spoken  it"  (Ezek.  34:  2,  3,  22-24). ^Zcch.  11  also 

develops  in  very  graphic  style  the  relations  of  Jesus  as  the  good 
shepherd  to  those  who  during  his  earthly  life  were  acting  the  ijart 
of  thieves  and  robbers  to  his  fold. 

Over  against  the  good  shepherd,  we  have  here  another  charac- 
ter— at  least  one  put  under  another  figure.  Thus  far  in  the  dis- 
course, the  enemy  is  a  thief  and  a  robber,  breaking  into  the  fold 
over  its  inclosing  walls ;  but  the  new  character  is  an  "  hireling," 
and  not  the  shepherd.  He  neither  owns,  loves,  nor  cares  for  the 
sheep.  He  cares  only  for  his  wages.  Seeing  the  wolf  coming, 
he  does  not  face  the  foe  and  fight,  to  save  his  flock,  but  runs. 
The  wolf  catches  some,  and  scatters  the  rest.  Nothing  less  than 
a  heart-felt  interest  in  the  flock  will  make  the  shepherd  brave  in 
peril,  and  if  need  be  self-sacrificing  for  their  good.  The  good 
shepherd  puts  himself  in  strong  contrast  with  the  hireling ;  and 
more  than  suggests  that  his  under-shepherds  should  be  like  him- 
self— true  and  even  fearlessly  brave  to  protect  the  sheep. 

]  4.  I  am  the  good  shepherd,  and  know  my  sheej),  and  am 
known  of  mine. 

15.  As  the  Father  knoweth  me,  even  go  know  I  the  Fa- 
ther :  and  I  hiy  down  my  life  for  the  sheep. 

At  the  point  where  the  contrast  would  seem  to  require  "  I  ccwe 
for  my  sheep,"  we  have  instead,  the  word  ^'knoio" — "I  know 
mine  and  mine  know  me  "  (the  best  manuscripts  have  it).  But 
the  word  "know"  came  ultimately  and  very  pertinently  up  to 
the  full  idea  which  the  contrast  leads  us  to  expect  here.  For,  in- 
timate personal  acquaintance  begets  sympathy  and  love,  so  that 
the  Hebrews  were  wont  to  use  the  verb  Jcnoiv  in  the  sense  of  lov- 
ing, caring  for.  Jesus  knows  every  believing,  trustful  soul — 
knows  each  one  perfectly;  never  fails  to  note  and  feel  every  sor- 
row, every  want,  every  outgoing  toward  himself  of  love,  gratitude, 
trust; — and  this  all-embracing  knowledge  begets  love  and  watch- 
ful care. "  They  know  me"  also — kitoio  in  a  like  full,  minute, 

comprehensive  sense — a  sense  which  begets  love  and  trust. 

Moreover,  let  it  be  noted  that  v.  15  stands  in  very  close  connec- 
tion with  v.  14 — closer  in  the  Greek  than  in  our  English — of  this 
sort:  "I  know  mine  and  mine  know  me,  even  as  the  Father 
knoAvs  me  and  I  know  the  Father."  The  analogy  between  Jesus 
and  his  people  on  the  one  hand  and  between  Jesus  and  his  Fa- 
ther on  the  other  is  the  point  made  here,  expressed  in  both  cases 
by  the  comprehensive  word  knoic — this  word  involving  not  merely 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.-CIIAr.  X.  161 

knowledge,  acquaintance;  but  the  love,  the  sj'mpathy  and  iiuituul 
interest  which  intimate  acquaintance  is  wont  to  beget. 

16.  And  other  sheep  I  have,  which  arc  not  of  this  fold : 
them  also  I  must  bring,  and  they  shall  hear  my  voice ;  and 
there  shall  be  one  fold,  and  one  shepherd. 

The  "  other  sheep  not  of  this  fold"  ai-e  without  doubt  Gentiles. 
"Not  of  this  fold"  because  the  "fold"  thus  far  since  Abraham 
had  included  only  the  covenant  people.  If  any  Gentiles  were 
brought  in,  they  came  as  proselj^tes  and  were  reckoned  as  of  the 
same  fold.  Hut  the  time  is  near  for  a  new  order  of  things.  Others 
in  great  numbers  arc  to  be  brought  into  the  fold  of  Jesus,  hearing 
his  voice  and  obeying  his  call.  So  shall  there  be  one  flock  (more 
true  to  the  Greek  than  "  fold  "),  for  the  idea  of  inclosure  is  slightly 
modified.     The  church  is  thenceforward  rather  a  flock  than  a  fold. 

17.  Therefore  doth  my  Father  love  me,  because  I  lay 
down  my  life,  that  I  might  take  it  again. 

18.  No  man  taketh  it  from  me,  but  1  lay  it  down  of  myself. 
I  have  power  to  lay  it  down,  and  I  have  power  to  take  it 
again.     This  commandment  have  I  received  of  my  Father. 

Twice  already  in  this  discourse  had  Jesus  spoken  of  laying 
down  his  life  for  his  sheep  (vs.  11,  15).     Here  he  resumes  this 

thought  to  say  yet  more  concerning  it. Two  points   deserve 

special  notice: — (a.)  That  the  Father  approves  the  sacrifice  even 
to  death  of  his  Son.  He  loves  his  Son  because  he  is  free-hearted 
to  make  this  sacrifice.  We  may  infer  from  this  that  the  Father 
is  perfectly  in  sympathy  with  the  scheme  of  atonement  in  which 
the  death  of  Christ  was  the  great  central  fact.  He  had  "so  loved 
the  world  as  to  give  up  his  only  begotten  Son  "  to  meet  this  death. 
In  his  view  the  prize  to  be  Avon  was  worth  this  cost. (&.)  Je- 
sus was  to  lay  down  his  life — not  as  a  failure  in  his  enterprise; 
not  as  a  warrior  falls  in  battle,  the  cause  of  his  country  falling 
with  him  ;  but — unlike  any  human  analogy — was  to  lay  down  his 
life  with  his  own  consent  and  with  power  to  take  it  again.  The 
death  of  Jesus  contemplated  a  glorious  resurrection — a  rising  to 

a  higher  life  and  to  a  mightier  power. "  This  commandment 

have  I  received  of  my  Father" — in  the  sense  that  this  was  in  the 
plan  or  scheme.  Jesus  was  to  lay  down  his  life,  but  also  to  take 
it  again — soon,  gloriously — to  reach  thereby  the  sublime  results 
uf  salvation  to  a  lost  world  and  of  infinite  honor  and  glory  to  God. 

19.  There  was  a  division  therefore  again  among  the  Jews 
for  these  sayings. 

20.  And  many  of  them  said,  He  hath  a  devil  and  is  mad ; 
why  hear  ye  him  ? 

21.  Others  said,  These  are  not  the  words  of  him  that  hath 
a  devil.     Can  a  devil  open  the  eyes  of  the  blind  ? 


162  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP,  X. 

As  usual,  the  words  of  Jesus  stir  the  Je^Yish  mind  profoundly, 
but  affect  various  men  Tariously.  Some,  here  as  elsewhere — now 
as  before — say :  "  He  hath  a  demon  and  is  mad  " — language  which 
shows  that  in  their  view  some  forms  of  demoniacal  possession 
produced  insanity — yet  whether  in  his  case  they  supposed  it  of 
such  sort  as  to  vacate  personal  responsibility  does  not  appear 
with  certainty.  Their  inference  in  this  case  was  that  a  man  so 
possessed  could  say  nothing  of  value ;  was  not  fit  to  be  heard. 
How  far  this  was  an  honest  conviction,  or  on  the  other  hand,  how 
far  it  came  under  that  law  of  mind  by  which  "  the  wish  is  father 
to  the   thought,"  we   are  left  to   infer  from  the   character  of  the 

men. Others,  with  more   and   better  reason,  said — His   words 

are  too  full  of  good  sense  and  wisdom  and  love  to  come  from  a 
demon  spirit  within  him.  And  besides,  think  of  what  he  has 
done  before  all  the  people.  Can  a  demon  open  blind  eyes  ?  Would 
he  if  he  could?  Have  ye  ever  known  such  a  case  ?  Can  ye  sup- 
pose a  demon  to  have  either  the  power  or  the  will  to  do  such  a 

miracle? Thus  folly  and  wisdom  were  in  sharp   discussion. 

There  were  some  men  of  sense  living  in  those  days ;  and  unfoi'- 
tunately  some  men,  high  in  religious  place  and  power,  whose 
speech  was  by  no  means  very  sensible. 

22.  And  it  was  at  Jerusalem  the  feast  of  the  dedication, 
and  it  was  winter. 

23.  And  Jesus  walked  in  the  temple  in  Solomon's  porcli. 

Appropriately  a  new  chapter  should  commence  here.  The 
time,  the  occasion,  and  naturall}'  the  theme,  have  entirely  changed. 
Since  the  opening  of  chapter  7,  the  events  have  gathered  close 
about  the  feast  of  tabernacles,  in  the  Jewish  seventh  montli. 
Here  we  are  set  forward  not  far  from  three  months,  to  the  latter 
part  of  the  month  Chisleu,  corresponding  to  our  Christmas  (Dec. 
25).  "The  feast  of  dedication"  was  in  progress  at  Jerusalem — 
a  feast  which  celebrated  the  cleansing  and  re-dedication  of  the 
temple  after  it  had  been  profaned  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes  and 
its  customary  sacrifices  suspended  three  and  a  half  years.*  ]t 
was  winter — the  rainy  season  of  Palestine ;  therefore  Jesus  did 
not  teach  in  the  fore-court  in  the  open  air,  but  in  the  eastern 
porch  of  the  fore-court  of  the  Gentiles  which  had  continued  to 
stand  at  the  destruction  of  Solomon's  temple  by  the  Chaldeans. 
Being  thus  a  relic  of   Solomon's   building,   it  fitly  retained  his 

name. Jesus  was  walking  to   and  fro  when  the   conversation 

here  narrated  took  place. 

24.  Then  came  tlie  Jews  round  about  him,  and  said  unto 
him,  How  long  dost  thou  make  us  to  doubt?  If  thou  be 
the  Christ,  tell  us  j^lainly. 

«  See  1  Mac.  4:  41-59  and  2  Mac.  10:  1-8  and  Joseplms  Antiq. 
12:   7,7.) 


GOSPEL  01'^  JOIIN.-CHAP.   X.  163 

To  the  Greek  verb  translated — "  make  us  to  doubt,"  some  crit- 
ics, closely  following  its  normal  significance,  give  the  sense — lift 
tip ;  excite  our  minds;  keep  us  in  this  unnatural  fever  of  expecta- 
tion. But  the  context  is  decisive  for  the  meaning — hold  us  in 
suspense ;  keep  our  minds  strained  upon  the  doubts  of  the  case. 

If  thou  be  the  Christ,  tell  us  in  plain  vrords,  publicly  spoken. 

This  complaining  tone  tacitly  assumes  that  Jesus  has  been  in 

fault,  while  they — poor  unfortunate  men — are  not  only  innocent, 
but  abused.  They  would,  forsooth,  be  very  glad  to  know  some- 
thing certain.     It  is  painful  to  be  kept  thus  in  suspense  I 

25.  Jesus  answered  them,  I  told  you,  and  ye  believed 
not :  the  works  that  I  do  in  my  Father's  name,  they  bear 
witness  of  me. 

26.  But  ye  believe  not,  because  ye  are  not  of  my  sheep, 
as  I  said  unto  you. 

Very  appropriately  Jesus  answers — Your  complaints  are  en- 
tirely gratuitous.  I  have  told  you  already,  but  yo  would  not  be- 
lieve. I  have  not  only  declared  myself  to  be  your  nation's  Mes- 
siah— the  Coming  One  foretold  by  your  prophets  in  your  own 
scriptures,  but  1  have  wrought  miracles  in  my  Father's  name 
which  have  been  his  witness  to  me.  Still  ye  have  neither  be- 
lieved my  word  nor  my  miracles.  "  Ye  believe  not  because  ye 
are  not  of  my  sheep."  The  Jast  clause — "  As  I  said  unto  you" 
is  omitted  in  the  Vatican  and  Sinaitic  manuscripts.  Tischen- 
dorf  also  omits ;  but  Alford,  Tholuck,  Meyer,  and  others,  retain 
them  because  not  far  from  three  months  had  transpired  since  the 
discourse  in  the  temple  (John  10:  1-18)  to  which  he  refers,  the 
text  of  which  was — "  I  am  the  good  Shepherd ;  "  "  my  sheep  hear 
my  voice,"  etc.  Some  of  his  hearers  on  this  occasion  may  not 
have  been  present  there,  though  obviously  many  of  them  were. 

27.  IMy  sheep  hear  my  voice,  and  I  know  them,  and  they 
follow  me : 

28.  And  I  give  unto  them  eternal  life  ;  and  they  shall 
never  perish,  neither  shall  any  man  pluck  them  out  of  my 
hand. 

29.  My  Father,  w'hich  gave  iliem  me,  is  greater  than  all ; 
and  no  man  is  able  to  pluck  them  out  of  my  Father's  hand. 

30.  I  and  my  Father  are  one. 

Those  who  are  really  my  sheep  are  not  troubled  with  the 
doubts  which  you  claim  to  feel.  They  know  my  voice ;  I  know 
them ;  they  follow  me.  That  peculiar  relation  of  shepherd  to 
flock  is  fully,  beautifully  developed  between  myself  and  my  peo- 
ple. Hence  they  are  surely  mine  forever :  I  give  them  life — not 
transient  life,  but  life  eternal.  They  shall  by  no  means  ever  per- 
ish -[the  Greek  is  very  strong] ;  no  one  shall  ever  pluck  them 
from  my  hand.     My  Father  also  is  pledged,  for  He  gave  them  to 


1G4  GOSPEL  OF  JOIIX.— CHAP.  X. 

me,  and  no  one  has  poAver  to  pluck  them  from  the  Father's  hand.* 

"  I  and  the  Father  are  one."     (The  approved  text  has,  not 

"my"  but  the  Father). The  peculiar  accuracy  and  force  of 

the  Greek  language  are  developed  in  these  words.  "With  the  help 
of  a  special  form  for  the  first  person  plural  of  the  verb,  they  are 
able  to  say — "  I  and  the  Father  loe  are  one." 

This  text  has  been  pressed  into  service  for  the  metaphysics  of 
theology  to  prove  that  the  Father  and  the  Son  are  one  in  essence, 
and  not  merely  in  sympathy,  purpose,  and  work.  Whatever  may 
be  true  as  to  unity  of  essence  in  the  case  of  the  Logos  and  the 
Father,  the  argument  as  made  from  this  passage  is  materially 
weakened  by  these  two  considerations : — (a.)  Tliat  the  context  de- 
mands nothing  beyond  unity  of  sjanpathy,  purpose,  and  work. 
If  the  passage  teaches  any  thing  beyond  this,  it  must  be  by  an  in- 
ference of  this  sort,  viz.  a  unity  of  purpose  and  of  operation  must 

assume  and  imply  unity  of  essence. Perhaps  we  are  scarcely 

competent  to  establish  such  an  inference.— — (5.)  It  is  by  no 
means  certain  that  the  speaker,  Jesus — the  "I  "  of  this  passage — 
is  precisely  equivalent  to  the  Logos.  Should  it  not  rather  be  as- 
sumed that  the  speaker  here  is  the  "Word  made  flesh,  dwelling 
among  us,"  and  manifesting  his  glory  before  human  eyes?  In 
this  view  of  the  case,  is  it  logical  to  assume  that  all  which  is  true 
of  the  Logos  as  existing  antecedent  to  his  incarnation,  can  be  af- 
firmed (as  to  essence)  after  the  incarnation — ?'.  e.  of  the  Son  of 
man  when  the  human  Avas  present  equally  with  the  divine,  in 
these  words  and  deeds  ? 

Another  controverted  theological  point  has  brought  vs.  28,  29, 
into  requisition — viz.  that  of  the  final  perseverance  unto  salvation 

of  all  the  truly  converted. This  is  not  the  place  for  extended 

theological  discussion.  A  few  words  may  be  due  in  the  interests 
of  exposition,  interpretation. 

To  break  the  force  of  these  verses  as  proof  texts  for  the  final 
perseverance  of  all  real  converts,  it  is  urged  that  for  aught  said 
here,  saints  may  tear  themselves  aAvay  from  Christ  and  so  perish 
— nothing  being  afiirmed  here  except  that  no  violence  y/'om  witli- 
011  i  shall  pluck  them  from  Jesus'  hand. 

To  this  it  may  be  replied;  (a.)  The  form  of  these  assertions 
adjusts  itself  to  the  figure  before  the  mind — that  of  sheep  and 
their  shepherd.  Noav  it  is  not  even  supposable  that  sheep  tear 
themselves  from  their  shepherd.  The  nature  of  the  sheep  utterly 
forbids  this.  To  suppose  it  Avould  be  in  revolting  violation  of 
the  genius  and  nature  of  the  figure  of  sheep  and  shepherd.  The 
only  danger  conceivable  in  the  case  of  sheep  is  that  they  perish 
from  Avolves  attacking,  or  from  thieves  and  robbers  breaking  into 
the  fold.  The  affirmation  is  therefore  purposely  made  as  sti'ong 
and  absolute  as  the  nature  of  the  figure  admits.     What  more  need 

®  The  Sir.aitic  and  Vatican  give  it,  not  nu/  Father,  but  the  Father. 
Tischendorf  and  Alford  follow  their  authority.  The  sense  is  not  -ma- 
terially affected  by  the  change. 


COSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  X.  1G5 

we  ask? (b.)  "Shall  never  perish"  guaranties  against  both 

violence  from  without  and  ajiostasy  from  within. (c.)  Other 

declarations  of  scripture  are  pointed  especially  against  the  danger 
of  lapsing  through  impulses  from  within; — e.g.  "Confident  of 
this  very  thing,  that  He  Avho  hath  begun  a  good  work  in  you  will 
perform  it  until  the  day  of  Jesus  Christ"  (Phil,  i:  G).  "Kept 
by  the  power  of  God  through  fiiith  unto  salvation  "  (1  Pet.  1 :  5), 

(d.)  Query:    Is  not  the  real  question  this — Whether  Jesus, 

the  good  Shepherd,  is  abh  to  take  care  of  his  own  sheep  so  that 
they  shall  not  fail  of  ultimate  salvation  ?  Are  his  i-esources  of 
power  through  his  providence,  his  word,  his  manifested  presence, 
and  his  Spirit — all  combined,  adequate  to  this  result?  In  mak- 
ing the  affirmations  before  us  in  these  verses,  did  he  duly  con- 
sider that  the  beings  given  to  him  of  the  Father  to  be  saved 
("  sheep"  thc}^  are  in  the  figure,  but  men,  human  beings,  in  the 
thing  figuratively  represented),  have  a  moral  nature — a  free  will, 
and  are  therefore  to  be  influenced,  not  so  much  by  physical  force 
as  by  moral  considerations,  adapted  to  free,  intelligent  mind  ? 
For  it  must  be  conceded,  I  think,  that  if  Jesus  made  these 
declarations  in  full  view  of  the  nature  of  the  beings  to  be  saved, 
there  can  be  no  reason  to  question  that  he  understands  his  work, 
and  i:  equal  to  its  accomplishment. 

31.  Then  tlie  Jews  took  up  stones  again  to  stone  liim. 

32.  Jesus  answered  them,  Many  good  works  have  I 
sliewed  you  from  my  Father;  for  which  of  tho-se  works  do 
ye  stone  me? 

33.  Tlie  Jews  answered  him,  saj'ing,  For  a  good  work  we 
stone  thee  not;  but  for  blasphemy;  and  because  that  thou, 
being  a  man,  makest  thyself  God. 

Note  how  quietly — shall  we  not  say  also  shrewdly — Jesus  as- 
sumes that  he  had  wrought  no  other  than  good  works — none  at 
all  that  were  bad.  But  had  he  not  a  perfect  right  to  make  this 
assumption?  It  served  only  to  put  the  actual  case  on  its  real 
merits.  Those  Jews  Avere  proposing  to  stone  him  for  some  of  his 
good  works,  or  good  words; — fitly  therefore  does  Jesus  ask — for 
which?  Let  them  think  which.  It  may  open  their  eyes  to  their 
mistake,  or  shall  we  not  rather  saj' — to  their  crime  f They  an- 
swer; Not  for  any  good  work,  but  for  blasphemy — the  blasphemy 

of  making  thyself  God  when  thou  art  so  manifestly  a  man. 

They  understood — at  least  they  claimed  to  understand — his 
words — "I  and  the  Father — we  are  one" — to  be  equivalent  to 
making  himself  God.  Prosecutors  are  under  great  temptation  to 
make  up  a  strong  case. 

34.  Jesus  answered  them.  Is  it  not  written  in  your  law,  I 
said,  Ye  are  gods? 

35.  If  he  called  them  gods,  unto  whom  the  word  of  God 
came,  and  the  Scripture  can  not  be  broken ; 


16G  GOSPEL  OF   JOHN.— CHAP.  X. 

36.  Say  ye  of  him,  whom  the  Father  hath  sanctified,  and 
sent  into  the  world,  Thou  blasplicmest;  because  I  said,  I  am 
the  Son  of  God? 

For  many  reasons,  but  especially  for  its  bearin2;s  upon  the 
views  which  Jesus  himself  held  respecting  his  own  divine  nature, 
this  passage  should  be  examined  with  the  utmost  candor  and  care. 

• Jesus  had  said,  "  I  and  the  Father — Ave  are  one."     This  was 

equivalent  to  calling  himself  "  the  Son  of  God"  in  a  very  special 
and  peculiar  sense.  Upon  the  testimony  of  these  words  the 
Jews  charged  him  with  blasphemy  in  that,  being  a  man,  he 
made  himself  God.  What  answer  did  Jesus  make  to  this  charge? 
He  appealed  to  their  law,  and  specifically  to  Psalm  82 :  1,  6,  which 
passage,  moreover,  refei's  to  Exodus  21 :  6,  and  22 :  8,  9,  28.  In 
these  passages  from  Exodus  civil  judges  are  called  Elohim — one 
of  the  names  of  God.  The  English  Bible,  however,  translates  the 
word  "judges."  But  in  Psalms  82,  the  same  word  in  the  same 
sense  is  twice  translated  "gods."  The  reason  for  applying  this 
word  "Elohim"  to  civil  judges  we  may  suppose  to  have  been  that 
they  were  acting  in  the  place  of  God,  in  his  behalf  administer- 
ing his  law;  also  that  the  original,  etymological  sense  made  it 
appropriate — the  high  ones — elevated  to  high  responsibility  over 
their  fellow-men.  It  may  be  added  that  this  name  for  God  ad- 
mits of  a  Avider  range  of  application  than  any  other  one  of  his  va- 
rious names — it  being  used  for  angels  (Ps.  8 :  6),  and  in  the  sin- 
gular number  for  the  gods  of  the  heathen  (Isa.  44:  10,  15,  and 
45  :  20,  and  46:  6).  (See  my  Notes  on  Ps.  82).  So  much  should 
1)6  said  as  to  the  words  quoted  by  Jesus  from  the  Old  Testament— 
"I  said,  Ye  are  Gods." 

Here  we  have  to  meet  the  question — What  is  the  nature  of  this 
self-defense  of  Jesus?  What  is  his  argument  and  Avhat  are  its 
legitimate  bearings? 

Two  suppositions  have  been  made: — {a.)  That  Jesus  puts  his 
own  case  on  the  precise  footing  of  the  Jewish  civil  magistrate,  in- 
ferring that  if  those  magistrates  were  called  "gods"  in  their  law 
and  there  was  no  blasphemy  in  giving  them  this  name  of  God, 
no  chai'ge  of  blasphemy  could  lie  against  him  for  calling  himself 
the  Son  of  God.  They  were  called  "gods"  because  the  word  of 
God  came  to  them — "word"  in  the  sense  of  commission,  dele- 
gating authority  to  act  as  judges  ;  including  also,  pei-haps,  the 
laws  they  were  to  execute  and  all  needful  instructions  as  to  the 

processes  of  civil  trial,  etc. Now  if  Jesus  puts  himself  under 

the  wing  (so  to  speak)  of  this  Old  Testament  usage  in  speaking 
of  civil  judges,  virtually  pleading  that  under  such  a  sanction  he 
might  at  least  speak  of  himself  as  the  Son  of  God  without  blas- 
phemy, we  have  one  theory  of  his  defense — one  which,  appa- 
rentl}'-,  makes  no  claim  on  his  pai"t  to  real  divinity. 

(6.)  Another  construction  of  his  argument  is  supposable;  viz: 
That  Jesus  does  not  by  any  means  tone  down  his  claims  as  to  his 
porson   and  work   to  the  grade  of  those  Old  Testament  judges; 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  X.  1G7 

does  not  assume  an  exact  analogy  between  himself  and  those 
judges;  but  makes  an  argument  of  this  sort:  "If  he  called  them 
gods  who  werconly  civil  judges,  ho^o  much  more  may  I,  being  not 
merely  one  "  to  whom  the  Avord  of  God  came,"  but  being  from 
eternity  the  verij  Word  of  God — myself  "sanctified"  [set  apart] 
of  the  Father  "and  sent  into  the  world"  as  his  Supreme  Vice- 
gerent, to  administer  his  moral  realm  as  Judge  and  Lord  of  all — 
how  much  more  may  I  with  propriety  speak  of  myself  as  the  Son 

of  God? In  this  view^  of  it,  his  appeal  to  the  Old  Testament  is 

made  because  those  Jews  held  their  ancient  scriptures  in  the 
highest  regard  and  even  reverence,  and  because,  an  argument 
drawn  from  their  usage  would  have  more  force  than  any  thing 
else  he  could  possibly  adduce. 

This  latter  construction  seems  to  me  unquestionably  the  true  one. 
The  phrase — "  unto  Avhom  the  word  of  God  came"  seems  chosen  of 
dosigu  for  the  purpose  of  suggesting  the  inference  as  put  above — 
JItiw  vntch  more  may  he  who  comes  from  the  Father  as  the  very 

Word  himself  be  called  the  Son  of  God. Then,  moreover,  a 

strong  point  of  difference  between  himself  and  those  ancient 
judges  lies  in  the  descriptive  points  as  to  himself — "  Him  whom 
the  Father  hath  sanctified  and  sent  into  the  world."  This  des- 
cription purposely  lifts  Jesus  entirely  above  the  grade  of  those 
ancient  judges  who  yet  were  called  "gods." These  consider- 
ations combine  to  sustain  the  latter  of  the  constructions  named 
al)0ve,  and  to  show  therefore  that  no  argument  adverse  to  the  true 
divinity  of  Christ  (in  his  own  view  of  himself)  can  be  drawn  from 
this  answer  made  to  the  Jews. 

37.  If  I  do  not  the  works  of  my  Father,  believe  me  not. 

08.  But  if  I  do,  though  ye  believe  not  me,  believe  the 
works;  that  ye  may  know,  and  believe,  that,  the  Father  is 
ill  me,  and  I  in  him. 

"  The  works  of  my  Father"  must  be  taken  here  substantially  as 
where  first  used  by  Jesus  (John  5 :  17),  "My  Father  icorkeih  hitherto, 
and  I  work."  I  am  working  as  he  works;  doing  the  same  things, 
in  the  same  spirit,  for  the  same  ends.  These  works  were  prima- 
rily his  miracles  of  mercy  and  of  power,  done  in  the  Father's 
name ;  in  a  sense,  by  means  of  the  Father's  power  and  specially  as 
an  indorsement  of  the  mission  of  his  Son.  Jesus  says — If  I  have 
not  performed  such  miracles,  believe  me  not.  If  I  have  per- 
formed such,  then,  though  ye  reject  the  testimony  of  my  word, 
yet  ye  must  accept  the  testimony  of  these  works — God's  own  tes- 
timony to  his  Son. 

In  the  latter  part  of  v.  38,  some  of  the  most  reliable  manuscripts 
give  us — not  "know"  and  "believe,"  but  know  and  understand. 
The  difi'erence  in  sense  is  (as  often)  of  small  account. 

39.  Therefore  they  sought  again  to  take  him;  but  he  es- 
caped out  of  their  hand, 


168  «  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  xr. 

40.  And  went  a^Yay  again  beyond  Jordan  into  the  place 
where  John  at  first  baptized ;  and  there  he  abode. 

Another  ebullition  of  rage  and  another  escape  of  their  intended 

victim.     The  time  for  his  ai-rest  had  not  yet  come. His  choice 

of  the  region  where  John  the  Baptist  began  his  work  was  made 
(supposably)  on  two  main  grounds :  Its  quiet  retirement  far  from 
Jerusalem  and  the  fiery  Pharisaic  zealots  who  frequented  that 
city;  and  also,  the  preparation  for  his  labors  which  naturally  re- 
sulted from  the  antecedent  labors  of  John. 

41.  And  many  resorted  unto  him,  and  said,  John  did  no 
miracle :  but  all  things  that  John  spake  of  this  man  were 
true. 

42.  And  many  believed  on  him  there. 

This  must  be  the  man  of  whom  John  speaks  as  to  come  after  him. 
He  fills  out  the  description  given  of  him  by  our  gi'eat  Teacher  of 
righteousness.  Besides,  he  Avorks  miracles  as  our  teacher  John 
did  not.     Thus  many  of  the  people  there  believed  on  Jesus. 


CHAPTER    XI. 

The  central  fact  of  tliis  chapter  is  the  raising  of  Lazarus  from 
the  grave.  The  story  is  told  in  full  detail,  with  some  of  its  re- 
sults. 

1.  l^ow  a  certain  man  was  sick,  named  Lazarus,  of 
Bethany,  the  town  of  Mary  and  her  sister  Martlia. 

2.  (It  was  that  Mary  which  anointed  the  Lord  with  oint- 
ment, and  wiped  his  feet  with  her  hair,  whose  brother  Laz- 
arus was  sick.) 

First  the  historian  identifies  the  man  Lazarus.  He  was  of 
Bethany — not  the  Bethany  where  John  the  Baptist  preached 
(John  1:  28),  but  that  Bethany  -which  lay  just  over  the  summit 
of  the  Mount  of  Olives,  east  of  Jerusalem;  fifteen  furlongs  (v.  18) 
— one  and  seven-eighth  miles — distant.  This  was  a  "  ioicn,"  in 
the  sense  of  a  small  unwalled  village  in  the  country,  and  was  known 
as  the  residence  of  Mary  and  her  sister  Martha — the  sick  man 
Lazarus  being  their  brother.  There  being  in  the  circle  of  Jesus' 
special  friends  several  of  the  name  Mary,  this  one  is  identified  as 
the  same  who  (John  12:  1-3)  "anointed  the  Lord  with  ointment." 

According  to  Jewish  tradition — more  or  less  reliable — Martha 

was  now  a  widow,  her  husband,  Simon  the  leper,  having  deceased. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CILVr.  XL  169 

It  is  more  to  our  purpose  and  more  reliable  that  the  riiniily  were 
in  easy  circumstances;  that  this  was  one  of  the  dear,  peaceful 
homes  of  the  man  of  Nazareth ;  that  Martha  delighted  to  minister 
to  his  personal  Avants ;  Avhile  Mary  delighted  not  less  to  sit  at  his 

feet  and  drink  in  his  blessed  words. The  sisters  come  to  view 

in  Luke  10 :  38-42,  and  also  again  in  John  12 :  1-3. 

3.  Therefore  liis  sister  sent  unto  him,  saying,  Lord,  Ije- 
liold,  he  Avhom  thou  lovest  is  sick. 

4.  AVhen  Jesus  heard  that,  he  said,  This  sickness  is  not 
unto  death,  but  for  the  glory  of  God,  that  tlie  >Son  of  God 
might  be  glorified  thereby. 

"Why  should  they  not  send  to  their  dear  sympathizing  friend, 
if  only  for  the  sake  of  his  sympathy  ?  But  they  had  known  so 
many  sick  ones  restored  by  his  power,  that  they  fondly  hoped  he 

might  Avork  such  a  miracle  upon  their  only  brother. This  first 

reply  of  Jesus  foreshadowed  the  viltimato  result  with  deeper  sig- 
nificance than  the  hearers  of  it  at  first  apprehended. This  sick- 
ness is  not  unto  his  final  death,  for  I  purpose  to  raise  him  from 
death,  that  the  glory  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  may  be  made 
manifest  thereby.  Jesus  was  accustomed  to  speak  of  his  miracles 
as  "  manifesting  forth  his  glory."     (John  2:  11,  and  11 :  40.) 

5.  Xow  Jesus  loved  Martha,  and  her  sister,  and  Lazarus. 

6.  When  he  had  heard  therefore  that  he  was  sick,  he 
abode  two  days  still  in  the  same  ])lace  where  he  was. 

7.  Then  after  that  saith  he  to  Im  disciples.  Let  us  go  into 
Judea  again. 

The  writer  seems  purposely  to  bring  together  these  two  fiicts — 
the  love  of  Jesus  for  this  family,  and  yet  his  delay  of  two  days 
before  he  set  off  to  visit  them  upon  their  very  urgent  call,  lie 
had  a  reason  for  this  delay.  The  writer  leaves  us  to  think  what 
it  might  be. 

8.  Sis  disciples  say  unto  him,  INLaster,  the  Jews  of  late 
sought  to  stone  thee  ;  and  goest  thou  thither  again  ? 

9.  Jesus  ansAvered,  Are  there  not  twelve  hours  in  the  day? 
If  any  man  walk  in  the  day,  he  stumbleth  not,  because  he 
seeth  the  light  of  this  world. 

10.  But  if  a  man  walk  in  the  night,  he  stumbleth,  because 
there  is  no  light  in  him. 

Sensitive  to  the  danger  of  their  Master  after  the  several  cases  of 
attempted  A'iolence  to  his  person  Avhich  had  alarmed  them,  it  is 
not  strange  that  they  gently  protested  against  his  going  again  so 

near  Jerusalem. The  reply  of  Jesus  imports  that  he  should  go 

fearlessly  where  his  life-work  lay,  and  should  expect  to  work  his 
twelve  hours  of  daylight  through  Avithout  stumbling. 


170  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XL 

11.  These  things  said  he:  and  after  that  he  saith  unto 
them,  Our  friend  Lazarus  sleepeth  ;  but  I  go,  that  I  may 
Avake  him  out  of  sleep. 

12.  Then  said  his  disciples.  Lord,  if  he  sleep,  he  shall  do 
well. 

13.  Howbeit  Jesus  spake  of  his  death :  but  they  thought 
that  he  had  spoken  of  taking  of  rest  in  sleep. 

Here  for  the  second  time  (see  the  first  case  in  Matt.  9 :  24,  or 
Afark  5  :  39,  or  Luke  8  :  52) — Jesus  spoke  of  death  as  a  sleep — a 
usage  in  respect  to  God's  children  ■which  has  long  since  become 
established — suggestive  of  whatever  is  most  sweet,  peaceful, 
blessed,  and  ultimately  restoring  in  the  highest  sense : 

"Asleep  in  Jesus — peaceful  rest, 
Whose  waking  is  supremely  blest," 

To  the  disciples  this  usage  was  yet  unfamiliar;  so  they  thought 
that  sleep  in  the  case  of  this  patient  might  be  a  favorable  symp- 
tom. 

14.  Then  said  Jesus  unto  them  plainly,  Lazarus  is  dead. 

15.  And  I  am  glad  for  your  sakes  that  I  was  not  there,  to 
the  intent  ye  may  believe ;  nevertheless  let  us  go  unto  him. 

16.  Then  said  Thomas,  which  is  called  Didymus,  unto  his 
fellow  disciples,  Let  us  also  go,  that  we  may  die  with  him. 

Their  misapprehension  bi'ought  out  the  explanation  in  plain 
terms — "Lazarus  is  dead."  For  j'our  sake  I  am  glad,  since  it 
prepares  the  way  for  a  manifestation  of  my  power  which  should 
confirm  your  fath  in  me. 

The  meaning  of  Thomas  in  his  remark  to  his  fellow  disciples 
turns  upon  the  reference  of  the  last  words — "  him."  Does  he 
mean,  let  us  go  and  die  Avith  him — Lazarus — as  intimate  friends 
sometimes  feel  when  a  dear  one  dies:  Let  me  die  also  and  go  with 
him ;  or  is  it  rather.  Let  us  go  with  our  !Master,  and  if  he  must 
die  by  the  violence  of  his  enemies,  let  us  share  the  same  fate  and 

rejoice  to  die  with  him? The  latter  is  the  more  rational  and 

therefore  probable — a  pleasing  testimony  to  the  loving  fidelity  of 
at  least  one  of  the  chosen  twelve. 

17.  Then  when  Jesus  came,  he  found  that  he  had  lain  in 
the  grave  four  days  already. 

18.  Now  Bethany  was  nigh  unto  Jerusalem,  about  fifteen 
furlongs  off: 

19.  And  many  of  the  Jews  came  to  Martha  and  Mary,  to 
comfort  them  concerning  their  brother. 

Of  these  four  days,  the  messenger  sent  may  have  mostly  occu- 
pied one  (the  distance  being  about  twenty  miles);  two  were  passed 
in  the  delay  before  setting  ofi"  (v.  6) ;  and  a  fourth  in  the  journey 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XL  171 

of  the  Savior  with  his  disciples.  This  would  show  that  Lazarus 
died  soon  after  the  messenger  started ;  also  that,  as  usual  in  the 
climate  of  Palestine,  interment  in   the  sepulcher  followed  very 

soon  after  death. The  high  social  position  of  this  family  and 

their  endearing  qualities  had  drawn  around  tliem  numerous 
friends,  of  whom  many  came  to  minister  whatever  comfort  their 
sympathy  and  condolence  might  afford. 

20.  Then  Martha,  as  soon  a.s  slie  heard  that  Jesus  was 
coming,  went  and  met  him :  but  Mary  sat  still  in  the  house. 

21.  Then  said  Martha  unto  Jesus,  Lord,  if  thou  hadst 
been  here,  my  brother  had  not  died. 

22.  But  I  know,  that  even  now,  whatsoever  thou  wilt  ask 
of  God,  God  will  give  it  thee. 

Martha,  impulsive  and  warm-hearted,  rushed  out  to  meet  Jesus 
when  she  heard  of  his  approach.  Thoughtful  JNIary  still  sat  mus- 
ing, waiting.  When  Martha  and  Jesus  met,  she  seems  to  have 
been  the  first  to  speak,  giving  expression  to  the  cherished  hope 
of  both  herself  and  her  sister,  that  if  Jesus  had  only  been  there; 
if  he  could  by  haste  have  reached  them  in  time,  her  brother  need 
not  have  died.  It  had  long  been  settled  in  her  mind  that  Jesus 
could  heal  the  sick.  In  fact,  she  goes  yet  a  little  farther.  Jesus 
is  a  man  of  prayer — as  she  has  had  frequent  occasion  to  know. 
She  hints  her  half-cherished  hope  that  if  he  were  to  give  himself 
to  prayer  in  the  present  emergency,  something — she  can  not  well 
surmise  what — more  perhaps  than  she  dared  to  hope — might  yet 
be  done. 

23.  Jesus  saith  unto  her.  Thy  brother  shall  rise  again. 

24.  Martha  saith  unto  him,  I  know  that  he  shall  rise 
again  in  the  resurrection  at  the  last  day. 

25.  Jesus  said  unto  her,  I  am  the  resurrection,  and  the 
life:  he  that  belie veth  in  me,  though  he  were  dead,  yet  shall 
lie  live : 

26.  And  whosoever  liveth  and  bclieveth  in  mo  shall  never 
die.     Believest  thou  this  ? 

27.  She  saith  unto  him,  Yea,  Lord  :  I  believe  that  thou 
art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  Avhich  should  come  into  the 
world. 

Remarkably  Jesus  advances  by  stages  of  progress  toward  dis- 
closing the  great  purpose  of  his  heart.  First,  "  Thy  brother  shall 
rise  again."     lie  did  not  say  token;  did  not  intimate  distinctly 

that  it  should  be  on  that  very  day. ]Martha  replied,  I  know 

that — if  thy  meaning  be  only  that  he  shall  rise  when  all  the  dead 
shall  come  forth  from  their  graves  at  the  last  day.  Thou  hast 
taught  us  that  before.  (John  5:  28,  29.)  Whether  this  were  a 
commonly  received  doctrine  of  the  Jews,  other  than  those  taught 


172  GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XI. 

by  Christ,  can  not  be  inferred  with  certainty  from  this  confession 
of  lier  faith  by  Martha,  for  she  may  have  learned  it  from  Jesus 

only. llien   Jesus   resumed   his   answer  in   those   wonderful 

words,  so  characteristically  brief  and  pregnant  with  meaninf^; 
"lam  the  resurrection  and  the  life;"  the  power  of  raising  the 
dead  and  of  all  real  life  resides  iu  me.  "  He  that  believeth  in 
me,  though  dead,  shall  yet  live"  in  the  resurrection  to  immortal 
life.  Also,  the  man  now  living  who  believes  in  me  shall  never 
die — the  second  death — the  death  eternal.  These  woi'ds  seem  to 
take  their  special  form  and  meaning  from  the  case  of  Lazarus, 
then  present  to  his  mind,  and  to  bear  relations  to  both  the  body 
and  the  soul — to  both  natural  death  and  immortal  life — thus : 
"  lie  that  believeth  in  me,  though  dead  " — as  Lazarus  now  is — 
shall  yet  live  (as  I  am  about  to  raise  him  to  life);  and  whosoever 
is  not  dead  (as  Lazarus  is  now),  but  is  living,  if  he  believes  in  me, 
shall  never  die  in  the  great  and  fearful  sense  of  death  eternal. 
Whether  one  is  now  dead  or  now  living,  faith  in  me  will  surely 
save  him  from  the  second  death,  and  ensure  to  him  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  body  and  eternal  life.  This  exposition  accounts  for 
the  antitliesis  between  "  Though  he  were  dead,"  on  the  one  side, 
and  "  Whosoever  liveth,"  on  the  other.  True  faith  in  Jesus  will 
save  each  class  unto  eternal  life. 

When  Martha  is  asked — "Believcst  thou  this?"  she  answers  as 
one  not  entirely  sure  that  she  had  his  full  meaning,  and  therefore 
puts  her  confession  of  faith  in  her  own  words  :  "  I  believe  that 
thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God  " — the  One  long  promised  to 
come  into  the  world.  I  believe  this,  and  she  would  imply  (prob- 
ably) all  else  that  is  involved  in  being  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God 
and  the  long  promised  Messiah. 

28.  And  when  she  had  so  said,  she  went  her  way,  and 
called  Mary  her  sister  secretly,  saying,  The  Master  is  come, 
and  calleth  for  thee. 

29.  As  soon  as  she  heard  tliat,  she  arose  quickly,  and  came 
unto  him, 

30.  Now  Jesus  was  not  yet  come  into  the  town,  hut  was 
in  that  place  where  Martha  met  him. 

3L  The  Jews  then  which  were  with  her  in  the  house,  and 
comforted  her,  when  they  saw  Mary,  that  she  rose  up  hastily 
and  went  out,  followed  her,  saying.  She  goeth  unto  the  grave 
to  weep  there. 

32.  Then  when  Mary  was  come  where  Jesus  Avas,  and  saw 
him,  she  fell  down  at  his  feet,  saying  unto  him,  Lord,  if 
thou  hadst  been  here,  my  brother  had  not  died. 

"Called  her  secretly"  we  may  suppose,  for  fear  of  the  Jews; 
it  being  well  understood  to  be  unsafe  for  Jesus  to  appear  in  pub- 
lic among  the  Jews  in  and  near  Jerusalem. 

Mary,  Avhose  modesty  or  contemplative   spirit  had  resti-ained 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  XI.  173 

her  from  going  out  uninvited  to  meet  Jesus,  now  moves  most 
promptly  uponliis  invitation.  Remarkably,  Jesus  still  remained 
where  Martha  had  left  liim — shall  we  suppose — resting  from  the 
fatigues  of  his  journe}^,  or  choosing  not  to  advance  to  the  house 
till  he  better  understood  the  state  of  things  there,  especially  as 
to  the  Jews,  hostile  to  himself;  or  perhaps  because  he  chose  to 
see  ]\Iary  also  alone. — But  some,  at  least,  of  the  Jews  followed 
Mary,  supposing  she  was  going  to  the  grave — a  very  natural  sup- 
position, this  usage  being  common  in  Palestine.  In  consequence 
of  thus  following  Mary,  a  considerable  number  of  them  were  pres- 
ent at  the  raising  of  Lazarus. We  may  notice  that  Mary's 

first  words  to  Jesus — falling  at  his  feet — were  the  very  same  as 
those  said  by  Martha  when  she  met  liim  (v.  21),  showing  that 
their  views  on  this  point  were  the  same — the  result  supposably 
of  their  conversation  on  the  subject.  So  far  their  faith  in  Jesus 
had  borne  them  before  they  met  him. 

33.  When  Je.sus  therefore  saw  herweephig,  and  the  Jews 
also  weepmg  which  came  with  her,  he  groaned  hi  the  s^^irit, 
and  was  troubled, 

34.  And  said,  Where  have  ye  hiid  him  ?  They  say  unto 
him,  Lord,  come  and  see. 

35.  Jesus  wept. 

36.  Then  said  the  Jews,  Behold  how  he  loved  him ! 

On  the  part  of  Jesus  these  were  tears  of  sympathy,  purely  and 
only.  For  there  was  no  occasion  to  deplore  the  fate  of  Lazarus, 
or  to  mourn  over  the  purposed  result  of  his  death,  viz.  the  rais- 
ing of  him  from  death  which  Jesus  fully  purposed  and  was  about 
to  do.  This  grand  event  would  avail  to  the  glory  of  God  and  to 
untold  consolations  to  God's  people  down  through  the  ages  by 
virtue  of  its  palpable  demonstration  of  the  great  fact  of  resurrec- 
tion from  the  grave.  It  Avas  therefore  not  for  these  things  that 
Jesus  wept,  but  because  he  felt  so  tenderly  the  appeal  to  his  sym- 
pathies. His  very  heart  was  sympathy.  So  the  historian  puts 
it: — "When  Jesus  saw  Mary  weeping  and  the  Jews  also — her 
friends,  weeping,"  his  own  bosom  swelled  with  emotion.  "He 
groaned  in  spirit" — our  English  version  has  it;  but  legitimately 
the  Greek  word  means  he  made  efforts  to  restrain  and  keep  under 
<lue  control  the  deep  tides  of  his  sjnnpathetic  feeling  ;  he  "  troubled 
himself" — (so  the  Greek);  the  effort  to  command  his  emotions 
produced  deep  agitation.  Did  he  think  also  of  like  scenes  of 
grief,  suggested  by  this,  which  his  all-embracing  eje  might  take 
in  around  myi'iads  of  dying  beds  and  open  graves,  where  the  ten- 
derest  of  human  ties  are  sundei'cd  and  hearts  are  torn  and  bleed- 
ing? Did  there  come  up  before  his  view  these  keenest  pains  of 
our  mortal  life — these  bitter  fruits  of  sin  and  death  as  seen  in 

this  dying  world? But  we  quite  fail  to  do  justice  to  this  scene 

unless  we  give  emphasis  to  the  point  that  our  Jesus  as  seen  here 
is  thorouglily,  not  to  say,  intensely /i!/7Ha«.     lli.s  sj^mpathies  are 


171  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XI. 

those  of  oar  own  human  nature.  We  know  this,  for  we  have  all 
felt  them.  We  feel  in  our  own  bosom  the  deep  sorrow  we  see 
manifested  in  other  human  bosoms.  The  tears  of  other  eyes  brino; 
tears  to  our  own.  We  may  not  be  able  to  tell  why ;  we  do  not 
stop  to  reason  why;  we  know  they  come.  Jesus  wept  because  he 
saw  Mary  weeping.  In  the  broader  view  of  the  results  in  this 
case  as  they  lay  before  the  mind  of  Jesus  he  might  see  much  to 
relieve  this  sorrow ;  but  still  his  sympathies  for  Mary  were  touched 
none  the  less.  It  Avas  human;  it  came  of  his  human  range  of 
view;  it  testified  to  his  sympathizing  human  heart; — and  herein 
lies  its  never-dying  charm  and  con.solation  for  his  suffering  peo- 
ple. It  is  consoling  to  think  that  our  Jesus  appreciates  and  does 
not  rebuke  these  sorrows  of  our  smitten  hearts ;  that  he  sees  the 
tears  that  fall  and  knows  the  pangs  of  bereavement:  has  wept  him- 
self over  such  scenes,  and  is  "  the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and 
forever."  Even  the  Jews  who  had  known  little  personally  of  Je- 
sus before,  were  impressed  by  this  manifestation  of  sympathetic 
sorrow; — "Behold,  how  he  loved  him !  "  Such  an  impression 
should  naturally  have  had  the  effect  to  conciliate  their  feelings 
toward  Jesus — perhaps  prepared  the  way  for  seme  of  them  (at 
least)  to  believe  on  him. 

37.  And  some  of  them  said,  Could  not  tliis  man,  Avliicli 
opened  the  eyes  of  the  blind,  have  caused  that  even  thi.s  man 
should  not  have  died  ? 

Even  some  of  these  Jewish  friends  of  the  family  suggest  that 
one  who  could  open  the  eyes  of  a  man  born  blind  might  have 
saved  the  life  of  Lazarus  if  he  had  been  present  in  season. — 
The  miracle  upon  the  blind  man  occurred  in  Jerusalem  and  ap- 
pears to  have  been  known  to  many.  The  two  cases  in  which  Je- 
sus had  restored  the  dead  to  life,  viz.  the  daughter  of  Jairus 
(Luke  8 :  49-56)  and  the  son  of  the  widoAV  of  Nain  (Luke  7:11- 
16  and  Mark  5:  35-42)  were  located  in  remote  Galilee,  and  per- 
haps were  not  generally  known  to  the  residents  in  Jerusalem. 
We  might  naturally  expect,  however,  that  the  dear  friends  in  this 
Bethany  household  would  have  heard  of  those  cases  of  the  really 
dead  restored  to  life  by  their  Lord. 

38.  Jesus  therefore  again  groaning  in  liimself  cometh  to 
tlie  grave.     It  was  a  cave,  and  a  stone  lay  upon  it. 

39.  Jesus  said.  Take  ye  away  the  stone.  Martha,  the  sis- 
ter of  him  that  was  dead,  saith  unto  him,  Lord,  by  this 
time  he  stinketh :  for  he  hath  been  dead  four  days. 

40.  Jesus  saith  unto  her.  Said  I  not  unto  thee,  that,  if 
thou  wouldest  believe,  thou  shouldest  see  the  glory  of  God? 

With  sympathetic  grief  still  unabated  Jesus  approaches  the 
grave.  As  was  the  custom  in  Palestine,  this  was  not  a  grave  dug 
in  the  earth  in  our  modern  style,  but  an  excavation  in  rock — more 
nearly  the   modern    tomb.      A  stone  closed  and  secured  the  en- 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  XI.  175 

trance.  Jesu.s  bade  the  bystanders  remove  the  stone.  lie  might 
have  applied  his  miraculous  power  to  remove  it,  but  he  never 
made  useless  displays  of  this  power  ;  never  applied  it  where  ordi- 
nary human  agencies  were  adequate. 

The  words  of  Martha  make  it  almost  certain  that  up  to  this 
moment  she  has  not  been  thinking  of  her  brother's  resurrection 
as  near.  Would  it  not  be  offensive  to  open  that  sepulcher — for 
decomposition  must  have  commenced  ?  She  shows  at  least  that 
she  supposed  him  to  be  really  dead.  There  can  be  no  stronger 
proof,  scientifically  considered,  of  absolute  death  than  decompo- 
sition of   the  body. Moreover,  though  it  may  seem   scarcely 

worth  the  mention,  her  simple-hearted  remark  shows  that  this 
was  no  farce — no  contrived  scheme  to  get  up  a  sham  miracle  for 

effect. Was  it  a  gentle  hint  to  Martha  that  she  had  been  slow 

of  heart  to  take  in  the  sense  of  his  words,  when  Jesus  reminded 
her  how  he  had  said,  "If  thou  wilt  believe,  thou  shalt  see  the 
glory  of  God?  "  We  do  not  find  precisely  these  words  on  record, 
but  their  sentiment  was  involved  in  the  first  Avords  of  the  Lord 
(v.  4)  which  may  be  supposed  to  have  been  sent  as  his  message 
to  the  afflicted  sisters,  and  was  perhaps  virtually  implied  in  v. 
25;  "He  that  believeth  in  me,  though  he  were  dead,  yet  shall  he 
live."  But  nothing  forbids  the  supposition  that  Jesus  said  these 
very  words  to  Martha,  though  the  historian  did  not  record  them. 

41.  Then  tliey  took  away  the  stone  from  the  place  where 
the  dead  wa.s  hiid.  And  Jesus  lifted  up  Im  eyes,  and  said, 
Father,  I  thank  thee  that  thou  hast  heard  me. 

42.  And  I  knew  that  thou  hearest  me  always :  but  bo- 
cause  of  the  people  which  stand  by  I  said  it,  that  they  may 
believe  that  thou  hast  sent  me. 

43.  And  when  he  thus  had  spoken,  he  cried  Avith  a  loud 
voice,  Lazarus,  come  forth. 

44.  And  he  that  was  dead  came  forth,  bound  hand  and 
foot  wnth  grave  clothes ;  and  his  face  Avas  bound  about  Avith 
a  napkin.  Jesus  saith  unto  them.  Loose  him,  and  let  him 
go. 

The  prayer  before  the  summons — "  Come  forth  " — was  specially 
designed  to  shoAV  the  people  standing  by  that  Jesus  wrought  the 
miracle  by  virtue  of  his  relation  to  the  Father — i.  e.  as  man 
rather  than  simply  and  only  as  God.  That,  as  the  Messiah, 
God's  Son,  incarnated  in  human  flesh — he  was  sent  from  God  to 
men;  was  teaching  men  as  one  from  God;  was  fulfilling  all  the 
functions  of  his  great  mission  from  heaven  as  one  sent  of  God 
and  indorsed  by  miracles  Avrought  by  the  power  of  God — these 
Avere  the  very  points  Avhich  Jesus  sought  to  make  clear  and  prom- 
inent before  the  JcAvish  mind.  Hence  the  fitness  of  this  audible 
prayer. 

Note  the  confidence  in  the  Father  Avhieh  this  prayer  breathes. 


176  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XI. 

I  know  (the  I  emphatic)  ;  I  know  past  all  doubt  that  thou  hear- 
est  IDC.  It  is  not  for  my  sake,  therefore — not  that  I  may  haA"e 
some  fresh  or  additional  proof  that  thou  hearest  my  prayer;  but 
that  the  people  standing  by  might  have  the  proof  they  need — 

"that  they  ■maj  believe  that  thou  hast  sent  me." Then  with 

loud  voice  that  all  the  people  might  hear — loud  also  (we  may  per- 
haps suppose)  as  a  suggestive  pre-intimation  of  that  final  peal 
of  the  archangel's  trump  which  shall  wake  all  the  sleeping  dead 
and  burst  myriads  of  humaji  sopulchers — Jesus  cried:   "Lazarus, 

come  forth!  ' The  Avords  were  few;  but  oh,  how  majestic  they 

seem  !  How  impressive  upon  those  who  stood  listening  to  the 
prayer,  and  looking  toAvard  the  open  sepulchcr  with  intense 
eagerness  for  the  possible  results  !  And  what  shall  we  say  of  the 
emotions  of  Martha  and  Mary  Avhen  with  their  own  eyes  they  saw 
their  dear  and  only  brother  actually  coming  forth  at  this  com- 
mand, swathed  in  his  grave  clothes,  his  face  bound  with  a  nap- 
kin !  That  is  our  own  brother,  living  again !  And  this  is  Avhat 
is  meant  by  the  resurrection  from  the  dead  !  So  Jesus  can  raise 
his  believing  people  from  their  graves  in  his  own  time,  and  so  he 
will ! 

It  may  aid  our  conceptions  of  the  value  of  Jesus  as  a  Friend  to 
ask  just  here  what  IMartha  and  ]\Iary  must  have  thought  of  him 
as  their  friend  in  their  great  need  ?  They  had  known  him  some- 
what before ;  but  never  before  as  now.  It  has  been  sometimes 
said  that  we  measure  the  worth  of  a  friend  on  this  twofold  scale; 
one  side  graduating  the  si/mpatJu/  that  is  born  of  love;  the  other, 
the  j)ouicr  which  is  available  for  help  in  need.  AVith  these 
standards  in  our  mind,  let  us  think  how  wonderfully  Jesus  re- 
vealed himself  to  the  sisters  in  this  emergencj^ !  Was  ever  hu- 
man sympathy  more  tender  and  pure  than  his?  What  sweet  con- 
fidence in  his  love  it  must  have  begotten  in  their  bosoms  ! 

And  then,  on  the  other  side,  there  was  power  to  help — it  were 
idle  to  wish  it  were  greater.  What  more  can  our  human  weak- 
ness ever  need  ?  How  safe  we  may  feel  under  the  wing  of  such 
a  friend  !  The  dear  sisters  at  Bethany  Avill  remember  these  testi- 
monies to  the  value  of  such  a  friend  as  Jesus  to  the  end  of  their  days. 
We  hope  they  rendered  many  a  song  of  thanksgiving  all  along 

their  after  pilgrimage  of  trials  and  griefs. And  is  not  their 

Jesus  also  our  own  ? — as  true,  and  quick,  and  tender  in  his  sym- 
pathies with  us  as  with  them  ?  as  mighty  to  save  in  our  Aveakness 
as  in  theirs  ? 

45.  Then  many  of  the  Jews  which  came  to  Mary,  and  had 
ceen  the  things  which  Jesus  did,  believed  on  him. 

46.  But  some  of  them  went  their  ways  to  the  Pharisees, 
and  told  them  what  things  Jesus  had  done. 

The  moral  power  of  this  miracle  was  immense.  Many  of 
those  Jews  who  were  present  believed  in  Jesus  at  once.  Yet  not 
all — for  some  turned  away  to  report  the  case  to  the  Pharisees. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAR  XI.  177 

Yet  even  there  it  still  appears  that  the  power  of  this  miracle  was 
very  great;  scarce  any  one  ever  wrought  by  Jesus  was  more  so. 
It  brought  matters  at  once  to  a  groat  crisis  in  the  Jewish  Sanhe- 
drim— as  the  historian  proceeds  to  say.  It  led  the  chief  priests 
to  consult  how  they  might  get  Lazarus  out  of  their  way,  because 
so  many  Jews  were  brought  by  his  resurrection  to  believe  on 
Jesus  (12:  10,  11).  And  it  moved  the  people  to  honor  him  with 
that  triumphal  march  into  Jerusalem  which  is  recorded  by  all 
the  Evangelists,  but  only  by  John  ascribed  to  the  impression 
made  by  this  miracle  (12:  17,  18). 

47.  Then  gathered  the  chief  priests  and  the  Pharisees  a 
council,  and  said,  What  do  we?  for  this  man  doeth  many 
miracles. 

48.  If  we  let  him  thus  alone,  all  men  will  believe  on  him  ; 
and  the  Romans  shall  come  and  take  away  both  our  place 
and  nation. 

Notice  here  that  Christ's  enemies  make  not  the  least  attempt  to 
dispute  the  reality  of  his  "  many  miracles."  Their  reasonings  as 
to  the  policy  to  be  pursued,  and  also  the  policy  itself,  rest  on 
these  two  assumptions:  (1.)  That  the  miracles  are  real;  (2.) 
That  the  masses  of  the  people  believe  them  to  he  real,  so  that  he 
became,  in  their  notion,  a  dangerous  man  to  the  nation  on  this 
special  account.     "If  we  let  him  alone,  all  men  will  believe  on 

him." But  why  do  they  fear  that  the  Romans  will  come  upon 

them? We  can  not  vouch  for  the  entire  honesty  of  their  pro- 
fessed fears  ;  but  the  pretense,  the  doctrine  put  forth  (honestly  or 
otherwise),  was  that  he  claimed  to  be  a  king;  that  his  kingdom 
Avas  so  far  "  of  this  world  "  that  it  would  come  into  collision  with 
the  jui'isdiction  of  Home,  and  bring  down  her  vengeance  upon 
the  Jewish  nation.  This,  they  said,  would  take  away  their 
"  place  " — in  the  sense  probably  of  exterminating  them  from 
their  country;  and  their  "nation"  then  of  course — in  the  sense 

of  putting   an   end  to  their  nationality. It  was  in  harmony 

with  these  notions  of  theirs  that  the  indictment  Avhich  they  em- 
blazoned on  his  cross  was — "This  is  Jesus,  the  King  o}'  the 
Jeivs;"  and  also  that  before  Pilate  Jesus  met  this  charge  by  de- 
claring— "  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world  "  (John  18  :  3fi). 

We  must  not  overlook  the  fearful  retribution  which  fell,  some 
forty  years  subsequently,  upon  Jerusalem,  and  the  whole  nation 
by  the  hand  of  this  Roman  power — fell  not  because  they  "  let  Je- 
sus alone,"  but  because  they  seized  and  murdered  him;  not  be- 
cause his  kingdom  brought  down  the  wrath  of  Rome,  but  because 
their  own  corruption,  depravity,  crime,  brought  down  on  them 
the  wrath  of  God ;  not  because  they  were  too  feeble  to  withstand 
the  sweep  of  Roman  ambition  and  conquest,  but  because  they 
,  Jifted  their  voice  to  God,  saying,  "  His  blood  be  on  us  and  on  our 
children"  (Matt.  27:  25),  and  God  answered — Let  it  be  as  ye 
have  said ! 


178  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XI. 

49.  And  one  of  them,  named  Caiaphas,  being  the  high 
priest  that  same  year,  said  unto  them,  Ye  know  nothing  at 
all, 

50.  Nor  consider  that  it  is  expedient  for  lis,  that  one  man 
should  die  for  the  people,  and  that  the  Avkole  nation  perisli 
not. 

51.  And  this  spake  he  not  of  himself:  but  being  high 
priest  that  year,  he  prophesied  that  Jesus  should  die  for 
that  nation  ; 

52.  And  not  for  that  nation  only,  but  that  also  he  should 
gather  together  in  one  the  children  of  God  that  were  scat- 
tered abroad. 

The  animus  of  this  speech  by  Caiaphas  went  to  tone  their  con- 
victions up  to  the  necessity  of  sacrificing  the  life  of  one  man, 
though  he  were  innocent  and  good,  for  the  sake  of  saving  tlie 
nation.  If  we  let  him  live  and  go  on,  our  nation  is  ruined.  It 
is  expedient  therefore  that  we  take  his  life  so  that  the  nation 
may  be  saved.  He  marvels  that  they  do  not  see  this : — "  Ye 
know  nothing  at  all"  if  ye  do  not  see  it;   for  what  can  be  more 

certain  ? Such  were  the  human  thoughts  of  this  high-priest, 

and  this  his  meaning  as  intended  by  himself,  and  understood 
by  the  council.  But  Ave  notice  that  in  the  view  of  the  Evangel- 
ist, his  words  were  shapcd^not  "  of  himself"  alone,  but  of  God, 
above  and  beyond  any  thought  of  his — so  as  to  become  a  proph- 
ecy— signifying  that  it  was  deemed  of  God  expedient  that  Jesus 
should  die — not  for  the  nation  of  Jews  only,  but  for  the  world — 
not  with  the  result  of  scattering  the  Jews  into  every  land  under 
heaven  (as  the  council  had  suggested,  v.  48)  but  rather,  of  gath- 
ering into  one  vast  brotherhood  the  children  of  God  from  all 
lands  of  the  earth — all  the  believing  and  redeemed — into  the  one 
spiritual  kingdom  of  the  glorious  Lord  of  all.  The  phraseology 
in  the  last  part  of  v.  52 — "gather  together  in  one,'  etc.,  seems 
designedly  put  in  contrast  with  the  words  of  the  council  in  v. 
48 — "  take  away  our  place  and  nation." 

As  to  the  possibility  of  such  unconscious  prophecy  from  the 
lips  of  the  high  priest,  there  can  not  be  the  least  question 
that  John  believed  in  it ;  nor  is  there  any  room  to  question 
that  his  construction  of  the  words  has  the  sanction  of  the  Spirit 
under  whose  inspiration  he  wrote.  There  is  no  shadow  of  au- 
thority for  assuming  that  this  was  merely  a  private  opinion  of 

his,  never  suggested  or  sanctioned  by  the  divine  Sjjirit. That 

it  is  possible  for  God  to  shape  the  words  of  a  bad  man  to  express 
a  prophetic  truth  of  which  he  had  no  thought,  I  see  no  reason  to 
doubt.  The  historian  suggests  that  his  being  "  high  priest  that 
year"  gave  occasion  to  subsidizing  his  lips  (so  to  speak)  for  the 
utterance  of  this  prophecy.  Under  the  ancient  regime  God  was 
wont  to  .speak  sometimes  "through  those  (officially)  sacred  lips. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  Xlf.  179 

53.  Then  from  that  day  forth  they  took  counsel  together 
for  to  put  him  to  death. 

From  that  day  the  policy  of  murder  Avas  fixed  and  only  waited 
its  opportunity. 

54.  Jesus  therefore  Avulked  no  more  openly  among  the 
Jews ;  but  went  thence  unto  a  country  near  to  the  wilder- 
ness, into  a  city  called  Ephraim,  and  there  continued  with 
his  disciples. 

This  place  of  retreat — Ephraim — is  supposed  to  be  identical 
with  Oplirah — about  twenty  miles  north  of  Jerusalem  (ijee  EUi- 
cott,  p.  24G). 

55.  And  the  Jews'  passover  was  nigh  at  hand  :  and  many 
Avent  out  of  the  country  up  to  Jerusalem  before  the  passo- 
ver, to  purify  themselves. 

56.  Then  sought  they  for  Jesus,  and  spake  among  them- 
selves, as  they  stood  in  the  temple,  What  think  ye,  that  he 
will  not  come  to  the  feast  ? 

57.  Now  both  the  chief  priests  and  the  Pharisees  had 
given  a  commandment,  that,  if  any  man  knew  where  he 
were,  lie  should  shew  it,  that  they  might  take  him. 

The  last  Passover — the  one  during  which  Jesus  suffered  on  the 
cross — is  now  at  hand.  In  the  group  of  those  who  came  up  early 
to  the  holy  city,  the  question  was  anxiously  put — Will  Jesus 
come? — showing  that  the  public  mind  was  intensely  moved  by  his 
miracles  and  by  his  teaching.  This  question  awakened  the  deeper 
feeling  because  it  had  become  generally  known  that  the  council 
had  issued  an  order  for  his  arrest,  commanding  all  loyal  citizens 
to  inform  the  authorities  where  he  might  be  that  they  might  take 
him.     Thus  the  lireat  crisis  was  hasteninc;  on. 


CHAPTER   Xll. 

This  chapter  groups  together  several  miscellaneous  points  :  the 
supper  at  Bethany  at  which  Mary  anointed  the  feet  of  Jesus  and 
the  revelation  made  there  of  the  character  of  Judas  (vs.  1-8) ; 
the  interest  among  the  people  to  see  Lazarus  and  the  plots  of  the 
chief  priests  against  his  life  (vs.  0-11);  the  great  triumphal  entry 
into  Jerusalem  (12-18)  which  excited  the  rage  of  the  Pharisees 
yet  the  more  (v.  19).  The  desire  of  certain  Greeks  to  see  Jesus 
(vs.  20-22)  leads  him  to  speak  of  the  great  crisis  of  his  life  then 
just  athand  and  its  bearings  upon  his  friends  (vs.  2.'>-2G)  and  upon 


180  GOSPEL  OF   JOHN.— CHAP.   XII. 

himself  (vs.  27-33) ;  the  nice  question  -whether  according  to  the 
Scriptures  Christ  should  abide  forever  (v.  34),  and  the  indirect 
reply  of  the  Master  (vs.  35,  36).  The  historian  finds  the  preva- 
lent unbelief  of  the  Jews  foretold  in  Isaiah  (vs.  37-41);  speaks 
of  the  vreak,  ineffective  faith  of  some  chief  rulers  (42,  43),  and 
gives  the  concluding  comments  of  Jesus  (vs.  44-50). 

1.  Then  Jesus  six  days  before  the  passover  came  to  Beth- 
any, Avhere  Lazarus  Avas  which  had  been  dead,  whom  he 
raised  from  the  dead. 

2.  There  they  made  him  a  supper ;  and  Martha  served : 
but  Lazarus  was  one  of  them  that  sat  at  the  table  with  him. 

3.  Then  took  Mary  a  pound  of  ointment  of  spikenard, 
very  costly,  and  anointed  the  feet  of  Jesus,  and  wiped  his 
feet  with  her  hair :  and  the  house  was  filled  with  the  odor 
of  the  ointment. 

While  many  of  the  people  came  up  to  Jerusalem  in  advance 
of  this  Passover  (11 :  55),  Jesus  also  came  at  least  as  far  as  Beth- 
any six  days  before  it  commenced.  This  social  supper  made  for 
him  was  an  expression  of  grateful  interest  for  the  raising  of  Laz- 
arus, and  an  opportunity  for  the  special  friends  of  the  family  to 

meet  both  Jesus  and  Lazarus. Matthew  and   Mark  speak  of 

this  feast  as  being  "  at  the  house  of  Simon  the  leper  "  (Matt.  26 : 
6  and  Mark  14  :  3) — a  statement  not  necessarily  inconsistent  with 
John  inasmuch  as  Simon  may  have  been  a  neighbor  and  intimate 
friend  where  Martha's  habit  and  nature  of  "serving"  (see  Luke 
10:  40)  found  scope.  Lazarus  sat  with  Jesus,  they  being  the  two 
distinguished  guests  of  the  occasion.  Mary's  work  was  specially 
the  service  of  love — with  a  pound  of  most  fragrant,  pure  and 
costly  ointment,  to  anoint  the  feet  of  Jesus  and  to  wipe  those 
sacred  feet  with  her  hair.  Service  done  to  the  feet  in  Oriental 
life  Avas,  as  we  might  expect,  menial,  and  for  this  reason  Avell  ex- 
pressed her  deep  humility  and  her  yet  deeper  love.  Was  there 
any  thing  involving  cost  or  personal  humiliation   she  would  not 

joyfully  do  for  this   dear  honored   Friend  ? We   love  her  for 

this  spirit,  and  wish   ourselves  might  haA^e  more  of  it. As  to 

the  manner  of  applying  this  ointment,  Matthew  and  Mark  con- 
cur in  saying—"  poured  it  doAvn  on  his  head  " — Avhich  may  be 
true  since  she  might  have  poured  it  upon  both  his  head  and  his 
feet;  or,  if  poured  upon  the  head,  it  may  have  floAved  doAvn  to 
the  feet.  Matthew  adds — "In  that  she  hath  poured  this  ointment 
on  my  hochj,  she  did  it  for  my  burial  "  (26:  12).  As  fragrant  odor 
v,-as  one  object  and  the  quantity  Avas  large,  no  discrepancy  in  the 
statements  can  be  complained  of. 

4.  Then  saith  one  of  his  disciples,  Judas  Iscariot,  Simon's 
so??.,  Avhich  should  betray  him, 

5.  Why  AA'as  not  this  ointment  sold  for  three  luindi-ed 
pence,  and  giA'en  to  the  poor? 


GOSPEL  OF  JOILY.— CHAP.  XII.  181 

G.  This  lie  said,  not  that  lie  cared  for  the  poor  ;  but  be- 
cause he  "was  a  thief,  and  had  the  bag,  and  bare  what  was 
put  therein. 

Judas  Iscai'iot  did  not  like  this.  John,  more  outspoken  as  to 
Judas  than  the  other  gospel  historians,  not  only  fastens  this  foult- 
finding  upon  Judas,  but  discloses  his  heart-motive.  Whereas, 
Matthew  (26:  8)  speaks  of  "the  disciples"  as  having  indigna- 
tion and  saying — "To  what  purpose  is  this  waste?"  and  Mark 
saj's  (1-1:  4) — "There  were  some  that  had  indignation  within 
themselves,"  John  is  entirely  definite  in  attributing  the  complaint 
to  Judas; — "Why  was  not  this  ointment  sold  for  three  hundred 

pence  and  given  to  the  poor?" This  was  (we  may  suppose) 

the  first  suggestion,  and,  seeming  to  some  others  at  first  view 
plausible,  they  may  have  too  easily  concurred.  But  John  gives 
Judas  no  credit  for  sympathy  -with  the  poor.  Being  the  treasurer 
of  the  company  and  a  thief,  it  was  for  his  convenience  to  have 
the  bag  well  filled.  Had  he  been  known  to  be  a  thief  before  ? 
John  assumes  this.  Arrant  hypocrite ! — that  he  should  ask  this 
money  in  behalf  of  the  poor,  yet  with  no  better  purpose  at  heart 
than  to  steal  it !  Such  a  man  could  be  mean  and  wicked  enough 
to  betray  his  blaster  for  money  ! 

As  to  the  estimated  value — "three  hundred  pence" — we  may 
remember  that  "two  hundred  penny  worth  of  bread  "  was  the 
estimate  for  supplying  five  thousand  men  with  their  supper. 
Hence  this  amount  would  provide  more  than  a  few  meals  of  bread 
for  the  poor.  But  such  a  manifestation  of  overflowing  love  and 
gratitude  to  Jesus  was  even  better  than  this. 

7.  Then  said  Jesus,  Let  her  alone:  against  tlie  day  of  my 
burying  hath  she  kept  this. 

8.  For  the  poor  always  ye  have  with  you;  but  me  ye 
Lave  not  always. 

Was  Mary  disconcerted  amid  tlie  murmurs  sprung  around  this 
table  by  the  rebuke  from  Judas  Iscariot?  Did  tlie  thought  per- 
haps begin  to  trouble  her  that  possibly  her  love  had  carried  her 
too  far?  If  so,  Jesus  came  kindly  and  in  good  time  to  her  re- 
lief:— "Let  her  alone;"  spare  those  cruel  criticisms;  not  a  word 
of  them  is  just.  As  reported  by  Matthew  and  by  ]\Iark,  Jesus 
said — "  Why  trouble  ye  her?  She  hath  wrought  a  good  work  on 
me.     She  hath  done  what  she  could.     She  is  come  beforehand  to 

anoint  my  body  to  the  burying." Was  she  so  far  in  advance 

of  the  disciples  in  her  understanding  of  Christ's  pi-ophetic  words 
that  she  Avas  already  forecasting  his  death  and  had  it  in  mind 
that  while  she  could,  she  would  give  his  body  its  last  obsequies? 
Or  was  this  anointing  anticipative  of  the  burial  only  in  the 
thought  and   plan  of  God?* Jesus  would  not  disparage  the 

*  In  the  last  clause  of  v.  7  some  of  the  best  textual  authorilics 
(the  Siuaitic  and   Vatican,  whom  Tischcndorf  and  Alford    follow) 


182  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XII. 

giving  of  alms  to  the  poor.  But  he  intimates — Ye  will  always 
have  opportunity  for  such  alms:  there  Avill  be  but  one  opportu- 
nity for  this  anointing  of  my  body  for  its  grave — but  one  for  such 
an  expression  of  grateful  sympathy  and  self-sacrificing  love. 

9.  Much  people  of  the  Jews  therefore  knew  that  lie  was 
there :  and  they  came  not  for  Jesus'  sake  only,  but  that  they 
might  see  Lazarus  also,  "whom  he  had  raised  from  the  dead. 

Through  the  wise  arrangements  of  God's  providence,  many 
Jews  from  Jerusalem  were  present  at  the  raising  of  Lazarus. 
The  startling  news  must  have  reached  many  others  in  the  great 
city.  Consequently,  this  familj^-supper,  which  was  an  outgrowth 
of  that  event  then  recent,  had  drawn  together  a  large  company, 
curious  not  only  to  see  and  honor  Jesus,  but  also  to  see  Lazarus 
who  so  lately  had  been  four  days  in  the  state  of  the  dead. Cu- 
rious, were  they?  Did  they  ask  him  what  he  could  tell  them  of 
that  unknown  world?     Did  they  come  hoping  to  hear  words  such 

as  had  never  fallen  from  human  lips  before? Whether  the  lips 

of  Lazarus  were  sealed;  Avhether  the  things  he  saw  were  simply 
"unspeakable" — such  as  it  were  not  possible  for  man  to  utter  (2 
Cor.  12  :  4) — we  are  not  told ;  but  not  a  word  from  his  lips  passed 
into  this  historic  record.  Our  historian  John  has  given  us  no 
light  as  to  the  supposable  testimony  of  this  man  from  the  realms 
of  the  dead. 

10.  But  the  chief  priests  consulted  that  they  might  put 
Lazarus  also  to  death ; 

11;  Because  that  by  reason  of  him  many  of  the  Jews 
Aveut  aw^ay,  and  believed  on  Jesus. 

All  this  awakened  interest  in  Jesus  of  Nazareth  and  this  con- 
viction of  his  true  INlessiahship  which  was  pervading  the  public 
mind  were  excessively  annoying  to  the  chief  priests.  Lazarus  in 
their  view  has  become  a  dangerous  man.  If  it  were  expedient 
that  Jesus  should  die  for  the  nation's  good,  it  must  be  equally  ex- 
pedient to  take  off  Lazarus.  Therefore  they  came  not  reluctantly 
to  the  conclusion  that  he  too  must  die.  No  scruples  of  con- 
science, no  recoil  from  the  crime  of  murder,  must  be  allowed 
to  stand  in  their  way. 

12,  On  the  next  day  much  people  that  were  come  to  the 
feast,  when  they  heard  that  Jesus  was  coming  to  Jerusalem, 

13.  Took  branches  of  palm  trees,  and  went  forth  to  meet 

give  it — "That  she  may  keep  it  unto  the  day  of  my  entombment" — 
in  this  sense  (we  may  suppose) — "Let  her  alone:"  it  is  noble  in  her 
thought  and  heart  "  that  she  should  keep  this  against  the  day  of  my 

burial." The  sense  is  not  changed  materially  by  this  modification 

of  the  text. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XII.  183 

him,  ;uid  cried,  Hosanna:  Blessed  is  the  King  of  Israel  that 
Cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord. 

14.  And  Jesus,  when  he  had  found  a  young  ass,  sat 
thereon ;  as  it  is  written, 

15.  Fear  not,  daughter  of  Sion:  behold,  thy  King  cometh, 
sitting  on  an  ass's  colt. 

IG.  Tliese  things  "understood  not  his  disciples  at  the  first: 
but  Avhcn  Jesus  was  glorified,  then  remembered  they  that 
these  things  were  written  of  him,  and  that  they  had  done 
these  things  unto  him. 

17.  The  people  therefore  that  was  with  him  when  he 
called  Lazarus  out  of  his  grave,  and  raised  him  fi'om  the 
dead,  bare  record. 

18.  For  this  cause  the  people  also  met  him,  for  that  they 
heard  that  he  had  done  this  miracle. 

Ilei'O  one  of  the  most  remarkable  and  most  public  events  in  the 
entire  recorded  history  of  Jesus  comes  before  us  in  its  historical 
and  logical  place.  We  are  shown  when  and  how  it  came  to  pass, 
and  Avhy  the  people  gathered  about  him  in  such  crowds  to  do  him 
homage  as  Sion's  Great  King.  The  people  that  were  with  him 
Avhen  he  summoned  Lazarus  from  his  grave  had  been  bearing 
their  testimony  to  that  deed.  JMoved  by  this  testimony  yet  other 
crowds  of  people  met  him  "because  they  heard  that  he  had  done 
this  miracle." John  omits  many  of  the  jiarticulars  of  this  tri- 
umphal entry  into  the  great  city — supposably  because  the  three 
earlier  historians  had  given  them  so  fully,  or  possibly  because 
those  details  were  somewhat  aside  from  the  main  purpose  of  his 
book.  Thus  Avhile  INIatthew  and  Mark  describe,  John  omits,  how 
Jesus  and  the  disciples  obtained  the  young  ass  on  which  he  rode ; 
how  they  got  the  owner's  consent;  how  the  people  spread,  not 
palm-branches  only,  but  their  garments  along  the  way  he  went; 
how  the  Avhole  city  was  moved  and  rushed  to  the  scene  inquir- 
ing— Who  is  this?  and  were  answered — "This  is  Jesus  the  Pro- 
phet, of  Nazareth  in  Galilee."  It  is  even  more  remarkable  that  he 
omits  certain  matters  recorded  by  Luke  only — e.  g.  that  some  of 
the  Pharisees  from  among  the  multitude  were  bold  enough  to  say 
to  Jesus  himself — "  Master,  rebuke  thy  disciples  " — as  if  this  scene 
were  all  too  noisy  and  rude  for  their  holy  city!  —  To  whom  Jesus 
made  answer — "I  tell  you  that  if  these  should  hold  their  peace 

the  stones  would  immediately  cry  out." Another  circumstance, 

recorded  by  Luke  only,  we  are  moved  to  ask  how  such  a  man  as 
John  could  possibly  omit;  viz:  that  when  he  was  come  near,  prob- 
ably descending  the  Mount  of  Olives  at  a  point  where  the  whole 
city  lay  open  to  his  view,  "he  beheld  the  city  and  n^ept  over  it, 
saying,  If  thou  hadst  known,  even  thou,  at  least  in  this  thy  day, 
the  things  that  belong  to  thy  peace ! — but  now  they  are  hidden 

from  thine  eyes ! Ah  indeed,  a  conqueror  in  triumph  and  yet 

in  tears !     Jesus,  at  the  point  of  his  highest  earthly  honor,  testi- 


]S1  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XII. 

fying  how  little  ho  thought  of  the  pageant  of  display  and  hoAV 
deeply  he  felt  for  the  souls  of  his  hopelessly  hardened  and  des- 
perately infatuated  enemies.  Never  elsewhere  so  near  the  point 
of  being  suitably  inaugurated  as  the  nation's  glorious  Messiah, 
yet  heart-burdened  even  to  tears  over  the  suicidal  madness  of  those 
who  "would  not  have  this  man  to  reign  over  them"!  Where, 
other  than  here,  have  the  records  of  royalty  in  its  triumphs 
evinced  such  compassion  for  the  guilty — sudi  tears  for  traitors  in 

arms ! We  are  thankful  that  Luke  did  not  omit  this  record : 

how  it  happened  that  John  left  it  out  is  scarcely  within  the  reach 
of  conjecture.  The  silences  of  Scripture  are  sometimes  more  re- 
markable than  its  utterances. At  this  point  it  naturally  occurs 

to  ask  how  the  first  three  evangelists  could  have  come  so  near  to 
the  great  facts  respecting  Lazarus  and  j-et  not  touch  them. 
They  tell  us  of  the  feast  gotten  up  in  honor  of  the  leading  par- 
ties— Jesus  and  Lazarus; — but  they  quite  omit  to  speak  of  its  re- 
lation to  the  raising  of  Lazarus;  leave  out  every  one  of  the  three 
honored  names  of  the  Bethany  household — ^lary,  Martha,  Laza- 
rus; tell  us  of  the  anointing  of  Jesus  with  the  precious  ointment, 
but  speak  of  her  Avho  acted  Mary's  part  only  as  "a  woman."  As 
said  already,  they  give  us  the  triumphal  entry  with  ample  detail, 
but  not  a  word  to  indicate  that  it  had  any  connection  with  the 
raising  of  Lazarus.  Was  not  this  great  event  sufficiently  prom- 
inent, sublime,  yea  also  tenderly  impressive  and  potent  in  its 
bearings  upon  the  violent  death  of  their  Lord,  to  entitle  it  tu 
some  notice  in  their  histories? 

For  myself  I  see  no  explanation  of  these  facts  so  plausible  as 
that  which  finds  it  in  the  respcctice  dates  of  the  writing  of  these 
books.  The  first  three  were  (supposablj')  written  before  the  death 
of  Lazarus;  the  fourth,  after.  While  Lazarus  yet  lived,  the  notori- 
ety which  the  inspired  record  of  these  facts  Avould  give  him  might 
be  painful  to  a  modest  man,  or  provocative  to  an  idle  curiosity  in 
others  ;  possibly  annoying  to  his  quiet,  if  not  even  dangerous  to 
his  life.  In  these  aspects  of  the  case  we  may  see  the  wisdom  of 
delaying  one  of  the  four  gospel  histories  so  long  after  the  occur- 
rence of  its  great  events. 

Returning  from  these  side  questions  to  our  main  siibject,  wo 
note  that  each  of  the  four  historians,  except  Luke,  finds  in  this 
triumphal  riding  into  Jerusalem  a  fulfillment  of  prophecy — that  of 
Zech.  9:  9,  10.  John,  and  he  onl^^,  adds  (as  we  should  expect  from 
him)  that  though  the  disciples  did  not  dream  at  the  time  that  they 
were  fulfilling  prophecy,  it  all  came  to  tliem  afterward  what  time 
the  Holy  Ghost  began  to  "bring  all  things  to  their  remembrance" 
which  Jesus  had  said  and  done  to  them  and  they  to  him,  and  to 
put  them  in  the  sunlight  of  prophecy  and  of  their  relations  to 
God's  great  scheme  of  salvation.  It  then  became  both  comment 
and  illustration  of  what  Jesus  had  said  of  that  particular  function 
of  the  Comforter  (John  14  :  26). 

This  triumphal  entry  must  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  extraor- 
dinary events  in  the  wonderful  history  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth.    This 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XII.  185 

is  tbc  only  event  which  has  in  any  measure  the  aspect  of  display. 
Here  only  did  Jesus  allow  himself  to  assume  the  air  and  manner 
of  a  king,  advancing  to  his  capitol  to  take  possession  of  his  throne. 
It  is  plain  that  the  time  had  then  come  for  a  great  change  of  pol- 
icy in  some  points;  for  whereas  Jesus  had  usually  sought  retire- 
ment rather  than  publicity,  and  had  avoided  what  might  expose 
him  very  seriously  to  the  murderous  designs  of  the  chief  priests, 
he  here  shrinks  from  no  publicity  and  seems  to  fear  nothing  from 
the  madness  of  his  enemies.  There  had  been  a  time  when  a  great 
multitude  were  ready  to  "  take  him  by  force  to  make  him  a  king;  " 
then  he  was  not  ready.  Over  and  over  again  he  slipped  away 
from  threatened  assault  or  arrest :  now  he  seems  to  feel  that  his 
time  has  come,  and  the  policy  of  fearlessness  in  duty  with  any 
exposure  is  in  order.  Consequently  events  are  shaping  them- 
selves rapidly  for  the  great  crisis. 

19.  The  Pharisees  therefore  said  among  themselves,  Per- 
ceive ye  how  ye  prevail  nothing?  behold,  the  world  is  gone 
after  him. 

See  how  the  Pharisees  are  stirred  up.  They  were  powerless  to 
stop  this  vast  procession  ;  poAverless  to  hush  the  voices  that  were 
making  the  welkin  ring  with  their  Hosannas;  but  they  could  meet 
in  secret  conclave  and  stir  up  each  other's  zeal  to  fury  against  the 
Nazarene,  and  plot  his  death.  "  The  Avorld  (said  they)  is  gone 
after  him."  They  could  not  stop  the  world  from  going;  they  saw 
the  scepter  of  their  power  over  the  people  in  danger  of  dropping 
from  their  hand ;  they  must  make  way  with  this  hated — this  dan- 
gei'ous  man. 

20.  And  there  were  certain  Greeks  among  them  that  came 
up  to  worship  at  the  feast : 

21.  The  same  came  therefore  to  Philip,  which  was  of 
Bethsaida  of  Galilee,  and  desired  him,  saying,  Sir,  we  would 
see  Jesus. 

22.  Philip  Cometh  and  telleth  Andrew:  and  again  Andrew 
and  Philip  tell  Jesus. 

This  visit  from  certain  Greeks — proselytes  from  the  Gentiles, 
we  must  suppose — stands  here  as  a  story  begun,  but  suddenly  left 
unfinished.  We  learn  very  particularly  how  they  obtained  their 
introduction,  and  that  for  some  unexplained  reason  they  wished 
to  see  Jesus.  The  introduction  came  naturally  through  Philip, 
who  was  himself  of  Bethsaida  in  Galilee,  and  probably  an  old  ac- 
quaintance. But  whether  they  did  see  Jesus,  and  if  so,  what  they 
said  to  him,  or  he  to  them,  remains  untold.  For,  the  remarks  that 
follow  (v.  23  and  onward)  seem  rather  addressed  to  those  disci 
pies  who  came  and  told  Jesus,  than  to  these  Gentile  strangers, 
since  they  appear  to  assume  a  long  previous  acquaintance  with 
his  teachings  and  historv.     It  v\-ould  seem  therefore  that  this  visit 


18G  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XII. 

of  these  Greeks  is  noticed  by  the  historian  only  because  it  became 
to  the  mind  of  Jesus  specially  suggestive.  It  brought  up  a  train 
of  reflections  upon  the  near  approaching  crisis  in  his  life-work. 
These  men,  said  he  to  himself,  are  moved  to  seek  a  personal  in- 
troduction to  me.  Are  they  aware  how  far  my  earthly  career  is 
already  run,  how  near  1  am  to  the  great  crisis ;  and  how  critical 
the  hour  must  be  for  those  who  are  willing  to  be  known  as  my  ad- 
herents ?  But  his  coui'se  of  thought,  suggested  by  their  request 
for  an  interview,  will  appear  in  the  sequel. 

23.  And  Jesus  answered  tliem,  saying,  The  hour  is  come, 
that  the  Son  of  man  should  be  glorified. 

24.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  Except  a  corn  of  wheat 
fall  into  the  ground  and  die,  it  abideth  alone :  but  if  it  die, 
it  bringeth  forth  much  fruit. 

25.  He  that  loveth  his  life  shall  lose  it ;  and  he  that 
hateth  his  life  in  this  world  shall  keej)  it  unto  life  eternal. 

26.  If  any  man  serve  me,  let  him  follow  me;  and  where  I 
am,  there  shall  also  my  servant  be :  if  any  man  serve  me, 
him  will  my  Father  honor. 

"Glorified" — i.  e.,  through  death  and  the  resurrection  and  ascen- 
sion to  the  highest  heavens,  and  to  the  highest  dominion  there — 
all  which  were  to  follow  soon.  The  analogy  in  the  vegetable  king- 
dom to  illustrate  this  change  from  weakness  to  power  is  at  once 
patent  and  beautiful.  A  grain  of  seed-wheat,  kept  dry,  remains 
itself  and  itself  only;  but,  laid  in  the  warm,  moist  bosom  of  its 
mother  earth,  it  dies;  yet  dying,  it  soon  rises  again  to  verdure, 
fruitage,  glory.  So  is  the  resurrection  of  all  the  righteous  dead ; 
so  specially  would  be  the  death  of  Jesus  and  its  resulting  conse- 
quences.  This  case  seems  to  have  suggested  the  related  anal- 
ogy which  appears  in  the  Christian  life.  He  who  lives  for  him- 
self only,  makes  an  utter  failure  of  life:  working  only  to  save  his 
life,  he  will  surely  lose  it.  On  the  contrary,  he  who  lives  as  if 
he  hated  his  life  in  this  world — who  lays  himself — his  life-power 
and  all  there  is  of  himself — on  the  altar  of  Jesus  for  other's  good, 
he  keeps  and  saves  himself  unto  life  eternal.  It  is  the  great 
Christian  paradox.  Give  thy  life  away  if  thou  wouldest  save  it  for- 
ever. In  niggardliness  and  the  tightest  selfishness,  labor  to  make 
the  utmost  for  thy  little  single  self;  so  shalt  thou  surely  lose  thy 
soul — thy  all.  The  force  and  beauty  of  these  principles  are 
heightened  by  their  twofold  application,  i.  e.,  both  to  Jesus  and 

to   his  believing  people. Onward  in  v.  26,  the  coui'se  of  the 

Savior's  thought  seems  to  be  on  this  wise:  Such  self-sacrifice; 
such  a  launching  forth  upon  self-abnegation;  such  disregard  of 
dear  life — are  not  according  to  the  common  impulses  of  human 
nature.  Men  will  need  some  powerful  motive  for  it.  Therefore 
let  me  point  the  way  and  suggest  the  reward.  As  to  the  way : 
"If  any  man  serve  me,  let  him  follow  mc."     I  ask  no  more  of 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XII.  187 

him  than  I  have  done  and  suffered  myself.  "  Where  I  ara,  there 
shall  my  servant  also  lie  " — which  ought  to  be  reward  and  in- 
ducement enough  for  all  who  love  me.  "  If  any  man  serve  me, 
him  will  my  Father  honor  " — and  what  higher  reward  should 
mortal  man  desire  ? 

27.  Now  is  my  soul  troubled  ;  and  what  shall  I  say  ? 
Father,  save  me  from  this  hour  :  but  for  this  cause  came  I 
unto  this  hour, 

28.  Father,  glorify  thy  name.  Then  came  there  a  voice 
from  heaven,  saying,  I  have  both  glorified  it,  and  will  glorify 
it  again. 

29.  The  people  therefore  that  stood  by,  and  heard  it,  said 
that  it  thundered  :  others  said,  An  angel  spake  to  him. 

30.  Jesus  answered  and  said,  This  voice  came  not  because 
of  me,  but  for  your  sakes. 

The  approaching  crisis,  involving  self-sacrifice  even  unto  death, 
seems  here  to  rush  upon  his  soul  in  most  vivid  forethought.  As 
Gethsemane  was  Calvary  in  anticipation,  this  is  Gethscmane  be- 
fore its  time — the  same  in  kind,  though  less  in  degree  and  in  du- 
ration. We  can  not  know  how  often  such  scenes  of  poignant 
grief  and  heart-trial  in  anticipation  of  the  dread  hour  may  liave 
occurred  in  the  experience  of  Jesus.  We  know  only  that  they 
come  of  our  fi-ail  human  nature,  and  in  the  case  of  Jesus  are  to 
be  ascribed  to  his  human  nature  only — not  at  all  to  his  divine. 
Historically,  only  John  refers  to  this  scene,  while  he  and  he  only 
passes  in  silence  the  apparently  more  protracted  scenes  in  the 
garden.  The  other  three  historians  have  described  Gethsemane 
Avith  considerable  fullness    (Matt.  26:  36-46;  Mark  14:  32-42; 

Luke    22:    39-46). "Now  is   my    soul   troubled" — agitated, 

tossed  with  anxious,  fearful  forebodings,  not  unmixed  with  per- 
plexities, indicated  by  the  question — "  What  shall  1  say  ?  "     What 

shall  I  pray  for  ? The  middle  clause  of  v.  27  ("  Father,  save  me 

from  this  hour  ")  is  read  in  some  texts  interrogatively;  in  others, 
affirmatively;  the  former  in  this  sense:  Shall  I  pray,  "Father, 
save  me  from  this  hour?"  Nay,  because  I  have  come  to  this 
hour  for  the  very  purpose  of  enduring  these  agonies — of  drink- 
ing this  cup  of  sorrows. The  affirmative   construction  makes 

the  middle  clause  itself  a  prayer — "  Father,  save  me  from  this 
hour;"  yet  supposes  the  suppliant  to  check  himself  suddenly 
with  the  thought:  1  may  not  insist  on  this,  because  I  came  to  this 
hour  in  order  to  meet  its  woes. The  ultimate  thought  is  sub- 
stantially the  same  on  either  construction.  In  favor  of  the  affirm- 
ative construction  it  may  bo  said  :  (a)  The  Greek  text  gives  no  in- 
dication of  an  interrogative.  (6)  The  more  full  expression  of 
feeling  in  Gethsemane  certainly  has  prayer  equivalent  to — "  Save 
me  from  this  hour  " — in  the  words  :  "  If  it  be  possible,  let  this  cup 
pass  from  me;"    "Ho  pra^'ed  that  if  it  were  possible,  the  hour 


188  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XII. 

might  pass  from  him;"  "Father,  all  things  are  possible  unto 
thee :  take  away  this  cup  from  me ;  nevertheless,  not  what  I  will, 
but  what  thou  wilt." 

In  this  case  the  prayer  upon  which  his  agitated  soul  settled 
down  at  length  was — "  Father,  glorify  thy  name."  To  this  a  voice 
from  heaven  brought  answer,  audible  at  least  to  his  ear  :  I  have 

glorified  it;  I  will  glorify  it  again. Of  the  bystanders,  some, 

hearing  a  sound  which  seemed  to  them  inarticulate,  mistook  it  for 
thunder ;  others  thought  it  the  voice  of  an  angel.  Such  utter- 
ances sent  down  from  heaven  will  be  heard  intelligently  by  those 
to  whom  they  are  specially  spoken  ;  not  always  by  all  others 
present.  In  the  case  of  Saul  of  Tarsus,  the  apparently  discrep- 
ant accounts  (Acts  9  :  7,  and  22 :  9)  are  best  harmonized  on  the 
supposition  that  while  Saul  heard  the  words,  his  attendants  heard 
only  inarticulate  sounds,  and  failed  to  get  the  words  spoken. 
Speculations  on  this  point  are  of  small  importance  ;  yet  obviously 
much  will  depend  on  the  receptivity  of  the  hearer.     Failure  to 

catch  the  words  may  be  due  to  perturbation. In  the  present 

case  the  voice  came  in  no  whispering  tones,  but  in  solemn  maj- 
esty ;  perhaps  thi'ough  angelic  ministration.  Jesus  remarked 
that  the  voice  came  not  for  his  satisfaction  but  for  theirs. 

31.  Now  is  the  judgment  of  tliis  world :  now  shall  the 
prince  of  this  world  be  cast  out. 

32.  And  I,  if  1  be  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  will  draw  all 
men  unto  me. 

33.  This  he  said,  signifying  what  death  he  should  die. 

The  course  of  our  Savior's  thought  here  taken  in  its  connection 
is  grand,  sublime.  From  extreme  depression,  agitation,  intense 
forecasting  of  woes  to  be  endured,  from  which  human  heart  and 
flesh  recoil,  he  rises  through  prayer — the  prayer  of  deep  submis- 
sion and  devotion  to  the  Father's  will — to  the  assurance  of  glori- 
ous triumph.  He  sees  the  crisis  of  this  world's  great  conflict  close 
at  hand.  He  sees  his  great  antagonist,  the  Prince  of  this  world, 
fallen,  cast  out,  dethroned,  despoiled.  Of  his  death  on  the  cross, 
indicated  here  as  being  "  lifted  from  the  earth,"  he  foresees  that  it 
will  itself  beget  an  attractive  power  which  will  draw  men  to  him- 
self in  love  and  homage.  The  first  effect  of  being  thus  "  lifted 
up,"  will  be  to  him  simply  torture,  heart-darkness,  his  cup  filled 
with  woes;  but  the  after  effects  will  be  the  dr.awing  of  men  away 
from  Satan  unto  himself,  the  casting  out  of  his  chief  antagonist 
— the  great  usurper — and  the  firm  enthronement  of  himself  as 
King  and  Lord  of  all. 

Instead  of  the  word  "judgment"  in  v.  31,  I  should  prefer  the 
Greek  word  itself  which  comes  into  our  English — crisis.  It  sig- 
nifies here  the  hour  of  destiny,  the  point  where  the  great,  long- 
pending  issues  of  the  conflict  come  to  their  final  decision.  The 
battle  has  been  fought — with  apparently  varying  fortunes  and 
pi'obabilities ;  but  now  the  combat  deepens ;  the  struggle  becomes 


GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  XII.  189 

desperate;  Satan  is  doing  his  utmost  and  liis  worst.  ITo  has 
gained  entrance  into  the  heart  of  one  of  the  twelve.  "  This  is  his 
hour  and  the  power  of  darkness ;  "  he  has  at  length  compassed  the 
death  of  the  Son  of  man,  and  the  deep  caverns  of  his  pit  rever- 
berate with  just  one  yell  of  fiendish  exultation! — hut  one;  no 
more  !  Alas  foY  him ;  how  soon  the  Crucified  One  rises  a  mighty 
conqueror ! — rises,  and  lo !  it  appears  that  his  very  death  on  the 
cross  has  lifted,  not  himself  alone  for  agony — but  all  men  by  its 
moral  power  of  love.  AU  men  are  lifted  and  dro-wn  away  from 
the  grasp  of  the  devil,  and  into  sweet  allegiance  to  him  who  hath 
"  loved  them  and  given  himself  to  die  for  them." Such  is  man- 
ifestly the  course  of  thought  in  this  wonderful  passage. 

As  to  the  details  of  exposition:  the  "Prince  of  this  world" 
contemplates  Satan  as  having  usurped  a  dominion  never  rightly 
his  own  ;  as  having  long  held  sway  over  the  nations  ;  but  as  be- 
ing now  prospectively  vanquished  and  cast  out  from  a  world  never 
his  into  "  the  place  prepared  for  him  and  his  angels." 

The  drawing  of  all  to  himself  need  not  be  pressed  to  the 
extreme  of  impljnng  the  actual  salvation  of  all  the  race.  Tho 
fact  that  Satan  is  thought  of  as  having  long  maintained  his 
usurped  dominion  as  the  Prince  of  this  world  should  preclude 
this  construction.  Let  it  rather  be  held  to  mean  that  the 
morally  attractive  power  of  the  cross  is  adequate  to  reach  all  va- 
rieties of  tho  human  heart;  that  it  develops  a  power  which  legit- 
imately impresses  all ;  and  that,  in  the  ultimate  result,  it  will 
reach  the  masses  of  the  race  with  efiective  salvation. 

The  word  "if"  in  the  phrase — "if  I  be  lifted  up" — can  not 
imply  any  contingency  as  to  the  future  fact.  Essentially  the 
sense  is,  icheii  I  shall  be;  inasmuch  as  I  am  to  be,  therefore 
whenever  it  shall  occur  these  will  be  the  results. 

34.  The  people  answered  liim,  We  have  heard  out  of  the 
law  that  Chi-Lst  abideth  forever:  and  how  sayest  thou,  The 
►Son  of  man  must  be  lifted  up?  wdio  is  this  Son  of  man? 

Thg  people  understood  his  being  "  lifted  up  "  as  implying  his 
death — so  far  rightly.  But  they  remembered  that  some  of  the 
prophecies  respecting  their  nation's  Messiah  had  spoken  of  the 
lierpetnitii  of  his  kiiu/dom.  In  fact  there  were  many  such  proph- 
ecies. (See  Pa.  72:  5,  7,  15,  17,  Isa.  9  :  7  and  60:  15,  19,  20  and 
Dan.  2:  44.) 

It  was  however  simply  their  mistaken  inference  that  this  pei-- 
petuity  of  his  reign  precluded  his  human  death  on  the  cross. 
They  had  yet  to  learn  that  their  nation's  Messiah  was  to  die  that 
he  might  conquer;  that  his  death  of  agony  was  to  be  the  very 
pivot  on  which  should  hinge  everlasting  victory  and  unutterable 
glory. 

35.  Then  Jesus  said  unto  them,  Yet  a  little  Avhile  is  the 
light  with  you.     Walk  while  ye  have  the  light,  lest  dark- 

9 


190  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  X]I. 

ness  come  upon  you  :  for  lie  tliat  Avalketli  in  darkiie.-s  kno'tV- 
eth  not  Avhitlier  he  goeth. 

36.  While  ye  have  light,  believe  in  the  light,  that  ye 
may  be  the  children  of  'light.  These  things  spake  Jesus, 
and  departed,  and  did  hide  himself  from  them. 

Xoticeably  Jesus  makes  not  the  least  attempt  to  relieve  their 
assumed  perplexities.  Did  he  see  that  these  -were  only  assumed 
and  not  really  honest?  Or  did  he  pass  them  as  trivial  and  un- 
worthy of  attention  ?     Did    he  deem   it  better  to  hold   them   to 

things  far  more  vital  ? The  latter  view  is  at  least  in  harmony 

with  his  reply  ; — Ye  have  light  noAV — for  a  little  while — light 
enough  to  walk  by  ;  therefore  use  it  tvhile  ye  have  it.  Soon  dark- 
ness will  settle  down  fearfully  upon  those  Avho  will  not  walk  while 
their  daylight  shines.  "While  ye  have  light,  walk  in  it:"  be- 
lieve in  what  truth  ye  really  know:  So  shall  ye  be  children  of 
light,  and  the  God  of  light  will  shed  on  your  soul  every  ray  ye 

may  need  in  future. With  these  monitory  words,  Jesus  closes 

this  discussion. 

37.  But  though  he  had  done  so  many  miracles  before 
them,  yet  they  believed  not  on  him : 

38.  That  the  saying  of  Esaias  the  prophet  might  be  ful- 
filled, which  he  spake,  Lord,  who  hath  believed  our  report  ? 
and  to  whom  hath  the  arm  of  the  Lord  been  revealed? 

39.  Therefore  they  could  not  believe,  because  that  Esaias 
said  again, 

40.  He  hath  blinded  their  eyes,  and  hardened  their  heart ; 
that  they  should  not  see  with  iheir  ej'es,  nor  understand  with 
tliexr  heart,  and  be  converted,  and  I  should  heal  them. 

41.  These  things  said  Esaias,  Avheu  he  saw  his  glory,  and 
spake  of  him. 

These  are  the  words  of  John — his  reflections  upon  the  sad  fact 
of  the  general  and  fatalunbeliefof  his  countrymen.  His  narrative 
of  the  discourses,  discussions,  and  moral  efforts  of  his  jMaster  for 
the  salvation  of  the  Jews  is  now  near  its  close.  How  often  had 
both  he  and  his  Master  "marveled  at  their  unbelief" — marveled 
with  great  astonishment  and  most  poignant  grief,  pressing  often 
tlie  question —  Why  is  this  ?  No  Avonder  that  long  and  thought- 
ful study  of  this  fact  brought  to  his  mind  the  words  of  Isaiah  here 
quoted — the  first  passage  from  53  :  1  which  gives  by  prophetic  an- 
ticipation the  grief  of  their  nation's  Messiah  over  the  almost 
imiversal  unbelief  of  his  covenant  people;  the  second  from  6:  9, 
10 — a  part  of  the  inauguration  services  at  the  induction  of  the 
prophet  into  his  work,  yet  in  the  view  of  our  author  referring  re- 
ally to  the  same  great  fact  of  the  na,tion's  rejection  of  their  Mes- 
siah through  persistent  unbelief  and  the  moral  blindness  to  whicli 
they  were  judicially  abandoned  in  the  righteous  judgment  of  Gnd 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XII.  191 

This  is  John's  owa  comment: — "These  things  said  Isaiali  he- 
cause  he  saw  his  glory  and  spake  of  him." 1"  Because,"  not 

"  when,"  is  the  best  sustained  reading.] 

In  the  closer  examination  of  these  quotations  and  their  bearings 
upon  the  unbelief  of  tlie  Jews,  the  most  difficult  and  altogether 
the  most  important  problem  is  to  adjust  their  teachings  to  the 
moral  relations  and  responsibilities  of  those  hardened  Jews  so  as 
to  put  in  its  true  light  the  mutual  action  of  human  and  divine 
agency  in  the  case.  Did  the  Jews  reject  Christ  in  unbelief /or 
the  purpose  of  fulfilling  Isaiah's  prophecies?  Was  it  impossihle 
for  them  to  believe,  and  if  so,  in  what  sense  impossible  ?  Did  the 
Lord  blind  their  eyes  to  the  end  tliat  they  should  not  see  and  be 

converted? These  questions  will  suffice  to  indicate  the  points 

that  seem  to  need  our  special  consideration. To  meet,  and  in 

some  measure  at  least  to  answer  them,  I  suggest : 

(1.)  It  is  entirely  legitimate  grammatically  to  read  v.  38,  in  its 
connection — not,  "  They  did  not  believe  to  the  end  that,  or  in  or- 
der that,  the  saying  of  Isaiah  might  be  fulfilled;"  but  thus: — 
"They  did  not  believe;  so  that  the  prophecy  came  to  be  ful- 
filled :  " — the  sense  being  this  ; — Inasmuch  as  tliey  did  not  be- 
lieve the  prophecy  was  fulfilled.  John  does  not  assume  or  assert 
that  those  un))elieving  Jews  intended,  purposed,  to  fulfill  Isaiah, 
or  even  thought  of  fulfilling  him.  Nor  does  he  mean  to  say  that 
the  Lord  led  them  on  into  their  unbelief /or  the  sake  of  fulfilling 
prophecy.  Nothing  more  is  necessarily  meant  than  that  their  un- 
belief did  in  fact  fulfill  Isaiah.* 

(2.)  The  words — (v.  39)  "  They  eo?;Z(Z  no<  believe,"  are  correctly 
translated.  The  Greek  verb  f  here  used  can  not  be  translated 
otherwise.  The  real  question  then  is —  Why  could  they  not  be- 
lieve?   AVhat  is  the  nature  of  this  impossibility  ? We  have  had 

the  same  problem  already  in  John's  gospel.  Jesus  used  the  same 
(Ireek  verb  (John  6  :  44) — "No  man  can  come  to  me  except  the 
Father  who  hath  sent  me  draw  him."  [The  reader  Avill  revert 
to  that  passage  and  to  the  notes  upon  it.]  The  "  drawing"  in  the 
case  came  through  being  "taught  of  God"  by  means  of  his  truth 
and  his  Spirit.  Why  were  not  these  Jews  thus  drawn  by  means  of 
being  taught  of  God's  truth  and  enlightened  by  his  Spirit?  Their 
history  gives  the  answer:  They  ivould  not  he  taught  in  the 
Avay  God  had  provided.  They  would  not  accept  the  Great  Teacher 
Avhom  he  had  sent.  They  would  not  believe  that  he  came  from 
God.     They  repelled  the  proof  he  gave  them    in  his   miracles. 

*  In  the  technical  language  of  grammarians,  the  two  very  diverse 
senses  of  the  word  which  stands  before  the  subjunctive  mood — ex- 
pressed above  in  a  popular  way  by  the  phrases — "  to  the  end  that" — 
and  "so  that" — are  called — the  former,  the  telle ;  the  latter,  the  ec- 
latie.    Writing  for  the  masses  I  aim  to  use  language  with  which  they 

are  familiar. Tt  seems  scarcely  necessary  to  give  the  arguments 

in  support  of  the  latter  rather  than  the  former  of  these  senses. 

t  ijcii'vavrn. 


192        ^        GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  xir. 

They  repelled  the  evidence  that  shone  forth  in  his  heavenly  life, 
his  loving  spirit,  his  fidelity  to  truth  and  duty.  They  said  he  had 
a  devil  and  was  not  fit  to  be  heard.  They  even  sought  to  murder 
the  important  witnesses  to  his  great  miracles.  In  every  way  they 
shut  their  eyes  to  the  light  of  God  and  their  heart  against  under- 
standing and  feeling  the  force  of  the  truth  of  God.  These  and 
nothing  less  or  other  than  these  were  the  simple  facts  in  their 
case.  It  was  thus  and  only  thus  that  it  could  be  said — "  He  (the 
Lord)  hath  blinded  their  eyes— that  they  should  not  see."  We 
must  interpret  the  moral  nature  of  the  divine  agency  in  this  case 
by  the  known  facts  respecting  the  mode  of  that  agency.  So  in- 
terpreting, we  are  forbidden  to  make  this  agency  a  direct  one 
with  intentional  and  purposed  aim,  producing  its  results  by  direct 
causation.  We  can  not  carry  it  beyond  the  line  of  a  permissive 
agency — which  means  that  God  suflered  moral  causes  to  work  out 
their  legitimate  results. 

He  sufi'ered  depraved  human  nature  to  run  its  self-persistent 
course,  and  to  produce  its  natural,  inevitable  fruits.  When  those 
Jews  would  not  believe;  when  they  spurned  all  the  light  from 
heaven  respecting  Jesus  their  Messiah  ;  when  they  repelled  every 
influence  that  wisdom,  love  and  tenderness  could  exert  upon 
them ;  when  they  labored  to  quench  all  testimony  for  Christ  even  in 
the  blood  of  the  witnesses; — when  they  ascribed  to  the  devil  the 
miracles  that  Jesus  Avrought  by  the  divine  Spirit — what  could  this 
be  less  than  the  unpardonable  sin  ?  How  could  the  result  be 
less  than  a  moral  hardening  of  their  own  hearts  which  a  right- 
eous God  for  the  safety  and  honor  of  his  moral  kingdom  must 
visit  with  irretrievable  damnation? (3.)  Our  question  legiti- 
mately involves  not  only  the  Idnd  of  agency  which  Jesus  had  in 
blinding  the  eyes  and  hardening  the  hearts  of  those  Jews,  but 
the  spirit  in  Avhich  he  worked  this  agency.  The  heart  of  Jesus 
in  this  whole  case  comes  vitally  into  the  main  c|uestion.  Fortu- 
nately on  this  point,  wo  are  left  in  no  doubt  whatever.  Both 
Luke  and  Matthew  have  recorded  his  words  at  the  moment  when 
the  sweep  of  his  eye  brought  to  his  view,  present  and  pro- 
phetic,— first,  this  moral  hardness  of  unbelief,  national,  deep, 
damning;  and  secondly,  the  ruin  that  within  a  single  generation 
was  to  whelm  the  holy  city  under  the  waves  of  a  most  terrific 

desolation. As  given  by  Luke  (19:  41,  4'2) — "When  he  was 

come  near,  he  beheld  the  city  and  wept  over  it,  saying — If  thou 
hadst  known,  even  thou,  at  least  in  this  thy  day,  the  things  that 
belong  unto  thy  peace ! — but  now  they  are  hidden  from  thine 
eyes." — In  Matthew  (23:  37,  38)  on  this  wise; — "O  Jerusalem, 
Jerusalem ;  thou  that  killest  the  propliets  and  stonest  them  that 
are  sent  unto  thee ;  how  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy  children 
together  even  as  a  hen  gathers  her  chickens  under  her  wings ; — 
but  ye  would  not!  Behold,  your  house  is  left  unto  you  deso- 
late."  Now  here  but  one  thing  need  be  said:  If  these  were 

honest  tears ;  if  these  were  truthful  words,  uttering  the  real  feel- 
ings of  his  soul,  then  it  is  simply  an  outrage  to  ascribe  to  Jesus 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— ciiAr.  xir.  193 

the  moral  purpose  to  harden  those  Jewish  hearts  and  bring  upon 
them  these  rushing -svavcs  of  dcsohition.  We  must  dismiss — nay 
more — we  must  put  utterly  from  our  heart  the  possibility  of  any 
direct,  purposed  agency  of  God  or  of  Jesus  Christ  to  make  those 
hearts  hard  and  unbelieving,  and  so  prejiarc  them  for  this  awful 

curse. (4.)  It  is  quite  another  thing  that  Jesus  should  deem  it 

wise  and  perhaps  unavoidable  to  let  human  depravity  run  its 
natural  course  and  work  out  its  legitimate  fruits  of  moral  obdu- 
racy unto  terrible  retribution.  It  is  the  law  of  our  moral  na- 
ture— indeed,  of  all  moral  natures  in  the  universe,  that  light 
sinned  against,  conscience  resisted,  progresses  onward  into 
deeper  hardness  and  yet  more  blind  and  mad  infatuation, — until 
there  is  no  remedy.  The  tendencies  and  fruits  of  such  sinning 
go  to  set  at  nought  all  remedial  agencies  and  to  drift  the  soul  into 
the  vortex  of  perdition. IS'ow  this  being  the  natural  and  inev- 
itable law  of  i^ersistent  sinning,  working  the  more  surely  and  rap- 
idly according  to  the  measure  of  light  sinned  against,  and  of 
mercy  despised,  why  should  not  Jesus  let  this  law  take  its  course 
in  the  case  of  those  who  "  set  at  nought  all  his  counsel  and  would 
none  of  his  reproofs" — who  had  the  light  of  heaven  as  it  came 
down  in  its  glory,  beaming  forth  from  the  very  face  of  Jesus  in  his 
words,  his  miracles,  his  tears  ? 

It  is  not  wise  or  well  to  complain  or  to  stumble  because  some 
of  the  sacred  writers  on  occasion  put  the  divine  agencies  in  the 
permission  of  sin  in  the  very  bold  and  strong  form  which  we 
meet  with  here.  It  was  by  no  fault  or  mistake  of  theirs  that  they 
saw  God's  hand  in  ihe  j^cnnission  0/  sin,  or  in  leaving  the  laws 
of  a  free  moral  nature  to  work  on  in  their  own  way — to  their  own 
natural  results.  They  had  ground  for  believing  and  for  saying  of 
some  sinners,  that  "because  they  received  not  the  love  of  the 
truth  that  they  might  bo  saved,  God  would  send  them  strong  de- 
lusion that  they  should  believe  a  lie,  that  they  all  might  be 
damned  who  believed  not  the  truth,  but  had  pleasure  in  unright- 
eousness" (2  Thess.  2:  10-12).  Such  declarations  should  lift  up 
their  voice,  loud  as  seven  thunders  along  the  pathway  of  self-har- 
dening sinners.  Let  them  never  be  ignored,  never  suppressed, 
never  stumbled  over  as  making  God  in  the  least  responsible  for 
any  sinner's  persistent  unbelief.* 

■■■■  The  following  comments  of  the  Author  in  his  Notes  ou  Isa.  6:  9, 
10  (pages  43,  44),  may  properly  be  introduced  here: 

Here  the  prophet  receives  his  message.  In  v.  9  he  is  told  what 
to  sa;/ ;  in  v.  10  what  to  do,  or  more  strictly  what  should  be  the  effect 
of  his  labor.  The  passage  is  peculiar  in  its  form  of  statement,  and 
therefore  should  be  considered  carefully.  In  v.  9  we  can  by  no  means 
take  these  imperatives  in  their  direct  sense  as  forbidding  the  people 
to  understand  and  perceive  what  God  is  saying.  They  must  there- 
fore be  taken  as  solemn  irony,  so  put  in  the  hope  of  arousing  their 
dull  hearts  to  serious  thought.  "Go  on  liearing,  since  so  you  choose 
and  will:  go  on  hearing  and  not  understanding;  go  on  to  see  and  yet 


194  *      GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIL 

42.  Nevertheless  among  the  chief  rulers  also  many  he- 
lieved  on  him ;  but  because  of  the  Pharisees  they  did  not 
confess  him,  lest  they  should  be  put  out  of  the  synagogue : 

43.  For  they  loved  the  praise  of  men  more  than  the 
praise  of  God. 

The  conviction  of  many  chief  rulers  "was  gained,  l)ut  not  their 
hearts.  This  could  not  have  been  true  gospel  faith,  fur  it  fell 
short  of  making  them  Christ's  servants  and  disciples.  There  was 
not  moral  power  enough  in  it  to  make  them  willing  for  Christ's 
sake  to  be  put  out  of  the  synagogue — not  enough  to  make  them 
love  and  value  the  approval  of  God  above  the  praise  that  comes 
of  men.  It  was  therefore  clearly  a  case  of  intellectual  convic- 
tion of  truth  which  yet  fell  short  of  inducing  hearty  obedience 
to  this  trutli.  A  state  of  fearful  sin  is  this, — holding  back  and 
resisting  the  legitimate  influence  of  truth  which  they  know  and 
are  compelled  to  admit  to  be  truth. 

44.  Jesus  cried  and  said,  He  that  believcth  on  me,  be- 
lievetli  not  on  me,  but  on  him  that  sent  me. 

45.  And  he  that  seeth  me  seeth  him  that  sent  me. 

perceive  nothing."  Alas!  you  will  find  ere  long  to  yonr  bitter  cost 
that  such  a  course  is  fvcauglit  with  ruin  and  death!  Why  will  ye 
madly  pursue  it?     Our  Lord  seems  to  speak  in  the  same  way  in  Matt. 

23:  32,  "Fill  ye  up  then  the  measure  of  your  fathers." V.  10  is 

addressed  to  the  jjrophet,  and  like  v.  9,  is  to  be  taken,  not  in  a  direct 
but  in  a  modified  sense;  not  as  enjoining  him  to  aim  and  labor  to 
harden  the  hearts  of  the  people  and  make  their  hearing  dull  and 
their  seeing  dim  or  unavailing;  but  as  indicating  what  must  be  the 
incidental  results  of  his  best  and  holiest  endeavors.  "Go  and  deliver 
my  messages  to  this  people."  They  have  resisted  my  call  hitherto: 
they  will  again.  Thus  far  they  have  shut  their  ears  and  closed  their 
eyes;  you  need  expect  no  better  hearing  and  seeing  from  them  here- 
after. Despite  of  your  most  tender  and  earnest  appeals,  they  will 
cleave  to  their  sins;  they  will  repel  your  invitations;  scorn  your  en- 
treaties; mock  at  the  threatenings  you  proclaim,  and  press  on  in  the 
way  of  rebellion  and  moral  ruin.  It  is  their  set  purpose,  and  they 
will  persist  in  it  to  their  certain  death.  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  has 
pressed  them  long  and  kindly,  but  with  no  good  result,  and  now 
they  must  be  made  a  terrible  example  of  the  ruin  that  comes    on 

those  who  will  "always  resist  the  Holy  Ghost." This  sti-ong  case, 

strongly  stated,  of  moral  obduracy  of  heart  and  of  judicial  visitation 
from  God,  manifestly  made  a  strong  impression  upon  at  least  the  good 
men  of  the  nation  in  future  ages.  AVe  have  proof  of  this  in  the  fact 
that  these  verses  are  referred  to  by  quotations  more  or  less  full  in 
at  least   six   passages  in   tlie   New  Testament.     See  Matt,  13:  14; 

Mark  4:  12;  Luke  8:  10;  John  12:  40;  Acts  28:  26;  Rom.  11:  8. 

Our  Lord's  use  of  it  in  the  discussion  which  grew  out  of  his  pa- 
rable of  the  sower  (as  in  JMathew,  Mark  and  Luke)  was  entirely  iu 


GOSPEL  01;^  JOHN.— CHAP.  XII.  195 

4G.  I  am  come  a  light  into  the  world,  that  whosoever  be- 
lieveth  on  me  should  not  abide  in  darkness. 

This  emphatic  public  declaration  of  truths  essentially  taught 
before  is  made  just  here  to  meet  the  case  of  those  half-way  be- 
lievers of  whom  the  history  has  just  spoken.  Whoever  believes 
on  me  believes  not  on  me  alone,  but  on  him  that  sent  me.  I 
come  into  the  world,  a  light  to  men,  so  that  none  who  really  ac- 
cept my  light  need  abide  in  darkness.  Let  all  half-hearted  be- 
lievers "take  notice  and  beware  less  they  miss  the  light  of  God  1 

47.  And  if  any  man  liear  my  words,  and  believe  not,  I 
judge  him  not:  for  I  came  not  to  judge  the  woi-ld,  but  to 
save  the  world. 

48.  He  that  rejectoth  me,  and  receiveth  not  my  words, 
liath  one  that  judgeth  him :  the  word  that  I  have  spoken, 
the  same  shall  judge  him  in  the  last  day. 

"Hear  my  words  and  Jcec])"  [so  the  best  authorities  have  the 
text] — "keep  them  not" — a  very  close  fitting  description  of  the 
class  of  believers  spoken  of  vs.  42,  43.  "1  judge  him  not"  noto — 
the  emphasis  being  on  now.  I  am  not  here  now  to  judge  men 
luit  to  save :  I  shall  come  in  due  time  to  judge.  The  word  that 
1  have  spoken  will  appear  in  that  great  judgment  day  as  a  swift 

li.irmony  -with  its  drift  and  purpose  as  it  stands  here  in  Isaiah,  i.  e., 
illustrative  of  that  judicial  blindness  to  which  God  leaves  sinners 
who  resist  his  Spirit,  and  set  at  nought  his  merciful  endeavors  to  en- 

litrhten  and  save  them. The  phraseology  of  Matthew  (13:  14)  and 

of  Paul  (Acts  28:  26)  is  slightly  modified  from  that  of  Isaiah.  It  is 
not,  "Shut  thou  their  eyes,"  but  "their  eyes  have  they  closed."  This 
change  makes  God's  permissive  and  judicial  agency  less  prominent, 
and  the  sinner's  own  voluntary  agency  more  prominent.  The  latter 
agency  Isaiah  most  fully  and  surely  implies;  and  the  former,  neither 

Matthew  nor  Paul  would  exclude. it  should  be  noted  that  these 

Apostles,  Matthew  and  Paul,  quote  from  the  Septuagint  which  reads, 
'•The  heart  of  this  people  has  become  gross;  with  their  ears  they 
hear  heavily"  (in  dullness),  "and  their  eyes  have  they  shut  lest 
they  should  see  with  their  eyes,"  etc.  This  is  entirely  correct  in 
sentiment,  yet  does  not  bring  out  in  its  full  strength  the  divine  agen- 
cies in  withdrawing  his  Spirit  and  giving  up  self-hardened  sinners 
in  judgment  to  their  own  free  and  guilty  choice  of  rebellion  and 
death.  It  puts  this  guilty  choice  and  this  persistent  refusal  of  the 
sinner  in  the  foreground  as  facts  never  to  be  ignored.  And  rightly. 
The  indorsement  of  this  view  by  our  Lord,  as  in  iSIatthew  (13:  14) 
and  by  Paul  (Acts  28:  26)  may  be  taken  as  a  timely  suggestion  and 
caution  against  over-straining  the  divine  agency  in  the  judicial  har- 
dening of  the  persistent  sinner.  It  would  be  ineffably  revolting  to 
give  it  such  a  construction  as  would  ignore  God's  love  and  pity  for 
even  the  guilty  sinner,  or  his  sincere  and  earnest  desire  that  they 
would,  any  and  all,  turn  from  their  sins  and  live." 


196  GOsrEL  OF  JOHN.— ciiAr.  xiir. 

witness  for  their  condemnation,  for  it  will  show  that  they  had 
abundant  light  fur  their  salvation,  hut  shut  their  eye  and  heart 
against  it. 

49.  For  I  have  not  spoken  of  myself:  but  the  Fathei' 
which  sent  me,  he  gave  me  a  commandment,  what  I  should 
say,  and  what  I  should  speak. 

50.  And  I  know  that  his  commandment  is  life  everlast- 
ing :  whatsoever  I  speak  therefore,  even  as  the  Father  said 
unto  me,  so  I  speak. 

These  words  recapitulate  and  re-aflirm  certain  points  of  most 
vital  testimony  in  the  public  debates  of  Jesus  with  the  Jews,  and 
come  in  appropriately  here  at  the  close  of  those  debates  and 
discussions.  Of  these  points  none  could  be  more  vital  than — 
(a.)  His  mission  from  the  Father — that  his  words  were  not 
his  own  but  the  Father's,  sent  through  himself  to  dying  men  ;  and 
(6.)  That  obedience  to  God's  great  message  through  Jesus  would 
insure  everlasting  life.  These  great  truths  will  bear  repetition, 
and  the  most  earnest,  emphatic  announcement.  The  issues  of 
life  are  in  them.  To  accept  thorn  as  true  and  obey  them  as  duty 
will  carry  life  into  souls  otherwise  dying  and  sure  of  death. 


CHAPTER   XIII. 

Jesus    with    Jits    Disciples. 

JOIIX  XIII-XVII. 

There  is  method  in  this  gospel  history  by  John.  It  is  througli- 
out  a  history  of  Jesus  who  is  ahvays  one  party  in  all  its  various 
scenes  and  transactions.  The  second  party,  shown  with  him,  is 
not  throughout  the  same,  but  varies  with  the  shifting  of  the  scenes. 
We  might  arrange  the  book  into  sections  on  this  principle — the 
varying  second  par  fi/. — 

(1.)  We  see  Jesus  (chap.  1-4)  in  his  relations  to  individuals  : — 
e.  g.  John  the  Baptist;  Nicodemus  ;  the  woman  of  Samaria:  be- 
sides which  in  chap.  2  we  see  him  in  a  group  of  family  friends. 

(2.)  In  chap.  5-12  we  see  him  in  his  relations  to  the  unbeliev- 
ing, questioning,  cavilling  Jews  (high  priests  and  Pharisees) — 
the  historic  incidents  being  introduced  mainly  for  the  purpose 
of  presenting  the  discussions,  arguments  and  exhortations  to 
which  those  incidents  gave  occasion. 

(3.)  In  chap.  13-17  we  see  Jesus  with  Ms  disciples — this  sec- 
tion being  made  up  almost  exclusively  of  free  conversations,  fare- 
well counsels,  expressions  of  sympathy,  love  and  confidence  :  clos- 
ing appropriately  Avith  prayer. 


GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIII.  197 

(4.)  In  the  next  section  wc  see  Jesus  with  his  murderers,  and 
have  the  betrayal,  the  arrest,  the  mock-trial  and  the  crucifixion. 

(5.)  Finally,  in  chapter  20  and  21  we  see  him  the  risen  Jesus, 
with  his  disciples  again,  for  parting  words  of  sympathy,  reproof 
and  counsel. 

AV'^ith  this  chapter  13,  we  enter  upon  the  section  which  presents 
Jesus  in  special  communion  with  the  twelve.  He  saw  in  the 
nearer  future  (what  they  did  not) — the  fearful  strain  of  that  trial 
to  which  their  faith  must  needs  be  subjected  when  he  should  be 
seized  by  ruthless  hands  and  hurried  away  to  a  death  of  shame 
and  agony.  In  the  more  remote  future  he  saw  that  his  resurrec- 
tion and  ascension  would  leave  them  alone  in  the  world — alone 
not  only  but  almost  utterly  friendless ;  not  friendless  only,  but 
encompassed  on  every  side  with  hostile  poAvers — the  civil  and  re- 
ligious authorities  of  the  land  in  deadly  antagonism,  watching 
them  with  Argus-ej^ed  jealously — in  the  intense  bigoti'y  of  their 
fiery  zeal,  thinking  that  to  kill  these  followers  of  the  despised 
IS'azarene  would  be  to  do  God  service.  Into  such  a  cold,  hostile 
world  Jesus  knew  that  his  disciples  would  be  launched  at  his 
death ; — and  not  only  launched  forth  to  live  themselves  as  best 
they  could,  wherever  they  might;  but  to  do  a  momentous  work; 
to  lay  the  foundations  of  the  Christian  church;  to  begin  the 
evangelization  of  the  wide  world — yea,  to  "go  forth  into  all  the 

world  and  preach  the  gospel  to   every  creature." Did  it  not 

seem  in  the  last  degree  preposterous  to  j^ut  a  few  Galilean  fisher- 
men and  converted  tax-gatherers  to  such  a  service  ? Manifestly 

there  were  many  things  to  be  said  to  them  and  done  for  them  by 
way  of  preparation  for  the  life-work  that  lay  before  them  when 

their  Head  should  have  been  taken  away. IIow  much  and  what 

preparation  they  did  require  can  by  no  means  be  adequately  ap- 
preciated without  very  careful  attention  to  the  leading  elements 
in  their  religious  thought  and  life  at  the  time  when  this  section 
of  their  history  opens.  To  this,  therefore,  let  us  for  a  moment 
turn  our  attention. 

When  Jesus  passed  his  eye  over  the  twelve  as  they  sat  around 
this  Passover*  board  and  thought  over  their  adaptation  to  meet 
the  trials  .and  do  the  work  before  them,  what  Averc  the  points  that 
would  most  impress  his  mind  and  shape  his  forewell  words? 

1.  With  the  exception  of  one  traitor — soon  Avithdrawn — the 
rest  had  some  true  Christian  faith  and  love,  yet  faith  and  love 
that  greatly  needed  culture  and  invigoration. 

2.  They  had  been  in  the  school  of  Christ  several  years ;  had 
learned  some  precious  truths,  but  had  much  more  yet  to  learn. 
Many  Avords  of  Jesus,  more  than  once  heard,  were  yet  but  half 
understood  and  needed  to  be  recalled,  reconsidered,  and  their 
deeper  significance  more  thoroughly  apprehended.     Especially  it 

*  The  question  Avhether  this  was  the  Paschal  supper  of  the  Jcavs 
has  been  hotly  contested.  We  can  not  debate  the  point  here,  but  avUI 
for  the  present  assume  that  it  Avas. 


198  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAr.  XIII. 

should  be  noticed  that  their  early  Jewish  misconceptions  of  the 
Messiah's  kino;dom  as  being  of  earthly  sort  needed  to  be  expelled, 
and  the  true  spiritual  conception  of  it  rooted  immovably  in 
their  place. 

3.  To  face  and  bear  those  near  impending  persecutions  which 
Jesus  foresaw  and  they  did  not,  it  was  vital  that  they  should  be 
not  only  forewarned  but  thoroughly  forearmed.  Every  thing  that 
forewell  words  could  do  to  deepen  their  love  to  their  Master  and 
his  cause ;  to  lift  their  souls  above  fear,  and  pain  and  even  death 
for  his  sake;  would  be  eminently  in  place  in  this  eventful  night- 
interview. 

4.  Comprehensively  let  it  be  noted  that  every  one  of  these 
great  defects  in  their  Christian  character  and  great  necessities  for 
their  future  work  combined  to  constitute  a  demand  for  the  pres- 
ence and  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  If  Jesus  could  be  with  them 
as  he  had  been,  he  might  encourage,  inspire  and  guide  them. 
But  he  is  going  up  to  the  Father,  and  therefore  the  Spirit  of 
truth  must  needs  come  in  his  place  to  do  all  and  more  than  all 
the  Avork  which  Jesus  had  been  doing.  There  is  much  therefore 
to  be  said  concerning  the  Spirit's  mission  and  work.  Nowhere 
could  this  be  more  in  place  than  here  and  now. 

Bearing  in  mind  these  facts  and  features  in  their  spiritual  state, 
and  in  their  approaching  orphanage,  persecutions,  and  immense 
labors,  we  shall  the  better  appreciate  the  meaning,  the  fitness,  and 
the  force  of  the  Avords  and  deeds  of  Jesus  during  this  eventful  night 
with  his  disciples. 

In  this  chapter  the  central  fact  is  the  washing  of  the  disciples' 
feet,  including  the  scene  itself  (vs.  1-5) ;  the  olijcction  made  by 
Peter  (vs.  6-11);  the  practical  application  of  this  example  (vs. 
12-20);  the  disclosure  respecting  Judas  the  traitor  (\s.  21-30); 
Jesus  forecasts  the  glory  of  the  nearer  future  (vs.  31,  32);  apprises 
the  disciples  that  he  must  soon  go  away  (v.  33)  ;  gives  the  new 
commandment  of  mutual  love  (vs.  34,  35) ;  and  forewarns  his  too 
self-confident  disciple  Peter  of  his  sad  fall  (vs.  36-38). 

1.  Now  before  the  feast  of  the  passover,  when  Jesus  knew 
that  his  hour  was  come  that  he  should  depart  out  of  this 
world  unto  the  Father,  having  loved  his  own  which  were  in 
the  world,  he  loved  them  unto  the  end. 

2.  And  supper  being  ended,  the  devil  having  now  put  into 
the  heart  of  Judas  Iscariot,  Simon's  son,  to  betray  him  ; 

3.  Jesus  knowing  that  the  Father  had  given  all  things 
into  his  hands,  and  that  he  was  come  from  God,  and  went 
to  God  ; 

Here  are  the  antecedents  of  the  feet  Avashing,  presently  to  be 
described,  including  the  external  circumstances,  and  especially 
the  internal  thoughts  and  facts  present  to  the  mind  of  Jesus  and 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— ciiAr.  xnr.  199 

to  be  taken  into  account  hy  the  reader  tliat  he  may  the  Ijettcr  ap- 
preciate tlie  transaction. 

It  was  immediately  before  the  feast  of  the  passover.  The  prep- 
arations for  this  feast  were  made  and  the  sapper  hour  had  come. 
The  clause  which  stands  in  our  version,  "  supper  being  ended," 
should  rather  be  read  :  Supper  being  on  hand  ;  or,  it  being  sup- 
per time.     Literally  it  is,  sirpper  being — i.  e.,  being  in  progress. 

Moreover,   the   purpose  to   betray  his  Master  having   been 

already  instigated  in  the  soul  of  Judas  by  the  devil  and  precepted 
by  the  ti-aitor,  the  agencies  were  at  work  for  his  spccd}^  arrest  and 
crucifixion.  All  this  Jesus  knew.  He  knew  therefore  that  he 
was  soon  to  depart  out  of  this  world  unto  the  Father.  The 
thought  that  he  must  so  soon  leaA'e  his  chosen  disciples  quickened 
his  love  toward  tliem.  He  had  loved  them  tenderly  before  ;  this 
love  threw  into  the  background  all  thought  of  his  own  impend- 
ing agonies,  and  l)lazed  forth  Avith  fresh  ardor  at  this  point — so 
near  the  end  of  his  personal  communion  with  them  upon  earth. 

■ He  is  now  about  to  perform  for  his  disciples  the  most  menial 

service  Icnown  to  the  usages  of  Oriental  life — that  of  washing  their 
feet.  The  historian  would  remind  us  that  Jesus  did  this  with  the 
fall  knowledge  and  under  the  present  power  of  the  thought  that 
the  Father  had  given  all  things  into  his  hand,  making  him  the  In- 
finite King  and  Lord  of  the  universe,  and  that  he  had  come  forth 
from  God,  having  been  from  eternity  "  Avith  God"  and  truly  God; 
and  was  just  al.iout  to  return  to  "  the  glory  he  had  Avith  his  Father 
before  the  world  was."  In  a  case  of  such  apparent  self-abase- 
ment, you  might  have  thought  (had  you  seen  it)  that  he  must  have 
been  oblivious  to  his  infinite  dignity;  unaware  and  for  the  time 
at  least  unconscious  of  his  Sonship  to  God  and  of  his  prospective 
exaltation  to  the  throne  of  the  universe — but  no  !  That  view  of 
his  consciousness  is  altogether  wrong.  John  would  forcAvarn  you 
against  it  in  the  outset.  This  AA'ashing  of  the  disciples'  feet  was 
done  by  the  Master  under  the  fallest  sense  and  consciousness  of 
his  superlative  glory  before  the  Father.  The  act  can  not  be  prop- 
erly appreciated  by  his  people  saA'e  as  they  hold  fully  in  mind  this 
present  consciousness  of  Jesus  in  the  transaction. 

4.  He  riseth  from  supper,  and  laid  a.side  hi.s  garments ; 
and  took  a  toAvel,  and  girded  himself. 

5.  After  that  he  poureth  water  into  a  basin,  and  began  to 
Avash  the  disciples'  feet,  and  to  Avipe  them  with,  the  towel 
AvhercAvith  he  Avas  girded. 

He  rose  from  the  supper-table  before  the  repast  had  fully  com- 
menced. The  guests  had  taken  their  half  recumbent  positions 
around  the  table  in  the  usual  Oriental  style,  reclining  upon  the 
left  side,  resting  on  the  elbow,  leaving  the  right  hand  free  for  ser- 
vice in  eating,  and  Avith  feet  extended  outAvard.  He  then  "  laid 
aside  his  garments  "  (so  the  record  has  it) — the  outer  garment 
certainly,  and   possibly  the  inner  one  also;  on  this  supposition, 


200  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.   XIII. 

supplying  its  place  in  part  with  the  largo  towel  girded  about  the 
waist  which  he  used  also  for  wiping  the  feet  after  the  washing. 
In  Oriental  exjierience,  washing  the  feet  Avas  regarded  as  a  luxury 
to  the  subject,  but  in  Oriental  idea,  a  most  menial  service  for  the 
operator.  None  but  the  lowest  class  of  servants  were  expected  to 
perform  it.  Its  rigid  restriction  to  this  class  was  due  not  so  much 
to  its  being  laborious  or  offensive,  as  to  the  poAver  of  a  caste  feel- 
ing which,  as  is  Avell  known,  is  wont  to  go  far  beyond  the  intrin- 
sic reason  of  things.  We  shall  fail  to  appreciate  this  act  of  the 
Master  unless  we  take  into  our  estimate  the  current  caste  notions 
of  the  people  among  whom  it  Avas  done.  In  this  act  Jesus  became 
a  servant  of  servants  to  his  disciples.  He  shoAved  that  to  serA'e 
Avas  the  business  of  his  life,  and  in  his  vicAV  was  not  to  his  shame 
but  to  his  glory.  It  Avas  an  example  to  illustrate  a  principle — the 
same  principle  which  is  stated  to  be  the  purpose  of  his  mission 
to  earth — "The  Son  of  man  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but 
to  minister,  and  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many"  (Matt.  20: 

28). More  is  said  below  of  its  purposed  moral  application  to 

his  disciples  in  that  age  and,  indeed,  in  every  other. 

6.  Then  cometli  lie  to  Simon  Peter:  and  Peter  saith  unto 
liira,  Lord,  dost  thou  Avasli  my  feet  ? 

7.  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him,  What  I  do  thou 
knowest  not  now ;  but  thou  shalt  know  hereafter. 

8.  Peter  saith  unto  him,  Tliou  shalt  nev^er  Avash  my  feet. 
Jesus  answered  him,  If  I  Avash  thee  not,  thou  hast  no  part 
with  me. 

9.  Simon  Peter  saith  unto  him.  Lord,  not  my  feet  onlj', 
but  also  viy  hands  and  my  head. 

10.  Jesus  saith  to  him,  He  that  is  washed  needeth  not 
save  to  Avash  his  feet,  but  is  clean  every  Avhit :  and  ye  are 
clean,  but  not  all. 

11.  For  he  kneAV  aa'Iio  should  betray  him;  .therefore  said 
he,  Ye  are  not  all  clean. 

Verse  six  opens,  not  "  then  cometh  he,"  but  consequently 
(Greek,  ovv),  i.  e.,  in  the  course  of  this  operation.  Peter  being 
one,  his  time  Avould  come;  whether  first  in  order,  or  not,  does  not 

appear. As  usual,  Peter  is  impulsive  and  very  out-spoken.     Did 

he  ever  have  a  thought  or  impulse  Imt  it  Avas  a  live  one,  and  Avould 

burst  out  ? It  seemed  to  him  very  repulsive — a  very  improper 

thing  in  his  divine  Lord — this  getting  doAvn  upon  his  knees  (per- 
haps) and  applying  Avater  to  other  people's  dirty  feet.  "  Lord  " 
(said  he)  "  dost  ThoiL  wash  my  feet?"  He  could  not  see  the  pro- 
priety at  all. The  first  reply  of  Jesus,  throAving  the  reason  of 

it  upon  the  judgment  of  the  Master,  did  not  relieve  Peter's  mind. 
Jesus  suggested  that  if  he  could  not  understand  it  now,  he  Avould 
at  some  future  time.  Peter,  less  considerate  than  he  might  haA'e 
been^  did  not  propose  to  take  this  strange  operation  upon  trust, 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  XIII.  201 

and  therefore,  under  the  impulses  of  his  deep  sense  of  its  impro- 
priety, exchiimed,  "  Thuu  shalt  never  wash  my  feet!"  It  might 
be  very  suitable,  he  probably  tliought,  for  me  to  wash   thy  feet ; 

but  never  shalt  thou  wash  mine! As  was  his  wont,  Peter  spoke 

very  strongly;  for  he  felt  so.  Perhaps  we  ought  not  to  blame  him 
severely;  yet  had  he  not  seen  enough  of  his  Master  to  justify  an 
unf\iltering  confidence  that  he  never  could  do  any  thing  improper, 
unreasonable;  never  a  thing  that  had  not  a  good  meaning  in  it? 
These  words  of  Peter  have  quite  too  much  the  air  and  tone  of  a 
rebuke — which  as  from  him  toward  Jesus  was  entirely  out  of  place. 

The  reply  of  Jesus — "  If  I  wash  thee  not,  thou  hast  no  part 

with  me" — brought  Peter  round  at  once  and  most  entirely.  Lord, 
if  that  is  the  case,  wash  me  never  so  much  ;  "  not  my  feet  only, 
but  also  the  hands  and  the  head." To  understand  the  final  re- 
ply of  Jesus  (v.  10)  it  should  be  noted  that  our  version  has  the 
same  word  "wash"  repeated — "He  that  is  washed  needeth  not 
save  to  wash  his  feet,"  but  the  original,  as  spoken  by  Jesus,  gives 
us  two  words — differing  in  their  usage;  the  first  used  for  a  full 
bath;  the  second,  for  washing  only  particular  portions  of  the  body 
— as  the  hands  or  the  feet.  The  primary  sense  of  the  words  of 
Jesus  must  therefore  be  this:  He  who  has  taken  the  full  bath — i.  c, 
of  the  whole  person,  has  no  occasion  to  wash  more  save  his  feet, 
for  in  coming  from  the  bath  his  bare  feet  may  have  been  soiled. 
80  much  for  the  primary  meaning.  It  assumes  the  habit  of  he- 
qnent  full  ablutions,  and  the  yet  more  frequent  washing  of  the 
feet  only.  In  preparation  for  this  passover,  the  disciples  (sup- 
posably)  had  taken  their  full' bath,  perhaps  before  they  left  Beth- 
any. Now,  after  the  walk  into  the  city,  only  the  feet  needed 
washing.* 

"  Ye  are  clean,  but  not  all  of  you  " — looked  toward  the  spir- 
itual sense  of  "clean."  Ye  are  washed  from  sin — all  of  you  save 
the  traitor  Judas.  The  rcmai'k  has  importance  as  showing 
that  washing  here  has  some  reference  to  its  figurative  or  spiritual 
import. 

The  deep  significance  of  this  washing  of  the  disciples'  feet  by 
their  Lord  remains  still  for  inquiry.  Shall  we  assume  that  it 
means  nothing  beyond  moral  cleansing,  analogous  to  the  physical 
cleansing  by  water  ?  So  some  have  supposed,  and  therefore  have 
found  here  only  another  Christian  ordinance,  corresponding 
closely  to  baptism.  Carrying  out  this  analogy,  they  compare  the 
full  bath  to  regeneration ;  the'  partial  washing,  as  of  the  feet, 
that  may  follow  from  time  to  time,  to  subsequent  special  clean- 
ings from  sins  of  later  life  as  they  may  occur. 

It  seems  to  me  this  construction  fails  to  reach  the  bottom  sig- 
nificance of  this  feet  washing.  It  overlooks  the  menial  character 
of  this  service  and  consequently  misses  the  illustration  of  blended 

*  Following  the  Sinaitic  manuscript,  Tischendorf  omits  the  Greek 
words  for  "other  than  the  feet;"  but  other  authorities  mainly  re- 
tain thcni.     If  omitted,  their  significance  must  be  implied. 


202  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAr.  XIII. 

liumility  and  benevoleuoe  which  shines  forth  in  it.  As  has  been 
ah'eady  said,  in  washing  his  disciples'  feet,  Jesus  filled  the  func- 
tion of  the  humblest  servant.  He  gave  himself  to  serve  his  peo- 
ple. He  put  in  act  what  he  long  before  put  in  word — "  The  Son 
of  man  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister."  In  this 
symbol  he  bore  our  griefs  and  carried  our  sorrows ;  nay,  more,  he 
went  calmly  and  lovingly  into  service  deemed  vulgar,  servile,  low 
— fit  emblem  therefore  of  the  scorn  and  shame,  the  spitting  and 
buffeting  which  culminated  at  length  on  the  cross  in  a  death  at 
once  of  agony  and  dishonor. Such  sei'vice  of  shame  and  suf- 
fering Jesus  came  to  render  for  his  people.  He  foreshadowed  it 
in  the  menial  service  of  washing  his  disciples'  feet.  "If  I  wash 
thee  not,  thou  hast  no  part  with  me,"  would  therefore,  in  this 
view  of  its  significance,  mean,  if  thou  canst  not  accept  my  menial 
and  most  humble  service,  as  of  one  who  is  to  bear  thy  griefs  and 
carry  thy  sorrows,   "  despised  and  rejected  of  men,"  thou  canst 

have  no  part  with  me. In  this  view  of  the  significance  of  the 

whole  transaction  we  may  better  understand  why  there  is  no  need 
save  to  Avasli  the  feet.  If  humilating  and  painful  self-sacrifice  for 
other's  good  was  the  thing  to  be  shown,  washing  the  feet  sufficed 
to  show  it,  and  no  further  or  other  washing  could  add  to  its 
value. 

Thus  f;ir  we  have  considered  this  act  of  feet-washing,  without 
reference  to  any  special  circumstances  at  or  near  the  time,  which 
might  intensify  its  significance.  Let  us  now  recall  the  incident 
stated  both  by  Matthew  (20:  17-28),  and  by  Mark  (10:  32-45)— 
that  when  Jesus  was  going  up  to  Jerusalem  to  attend  this  very 
passover,  the  mother  of  Zebedee's  children  (James  and  John) 
came  to  him  with  a  very  special  request; — "  Grant  that  these  my 
two  sons  may  sit,  the  one  on  thy  right  hand  and  the  other  on  thy 
left,  in  thy  kingdom."  As  Mark  has  it  the  two  sons  themselves 
came,  seeking  to  commit  Jesus  to  the  granting  of  their  request 
before  they  had  indicated  Avhat  it  was; — "We  w'ould  that  thou 
shouldest  do  for  us  whatsoever  we  shall  desire."  With  more  of 
mildness  and  less  of  sharp  rebuke  than  we  should  expect,  Jesus 
replied — "Ye  know  not  Avhat  ye  ask;  " — there  will  be  more  of 
suiforing  and  toil  in  reaching  the  honor  ye  seek  than  3-e  dream  of. 
The  honors  of  my  kingdom  come,  not  as  ye  are  thinking,  but  only 

through  the  baptism  of  sufiering  and  blood. This  adroit  push 

of  the  two  brethren  to  be  in  advance  of  all  others  in  their  appli- 
cation for  the  chief  honors  of  the  coming  kingdom  excited  the  in- 
dignation of  the  other  ten.  The  resulting  unpleasantness  seems 
not  to  have  altogether  subsided  when  they  came  around  this  sup- 
per-table. For  Luke  (22:  24),  speaking  of  "a  strife  among  them 
which  should  be  accounted  the  greatest,"  locates  it  in  the  midst  of 
the  scenes  of  this  supper.  This  shows  at  least  that  the  spirit  of 
aspiration  for  pre-eminence  had  not  subsided  but  Avas  still  rife  even 
here.  Some  critics  suggest  that  by  Jewish  usage,  the  feet  of  all 
the  party  were  to  be  washed  at  this  table ;  that  as  Jesus  and  his 
twelve  employed  no  servant   for  tlieir  menial  Avork,  this  service 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— ciiAr.  xiir.  203 

nccossiwily  devolved  upon  some  one  of  their  number ;  that  in  the 
present  case,  no  one  offered  himself  for  this  service,  but  in  far  other 
spirit  each  was  ambitious  to  get  the  first  honors  in  the  expected 
kingdom;  and  that,  therefore,  Jesus  rose  from  the  table  and  per- 
formed the  service  himself  It  will  be  readily  seen  that  under 
such  circumstances  the  act  must  have  been  a  pertinent  and  pun- 
gent rebuke,  which  could  not  be  soon  forgotten. 

12.  So  after  ho  had  washed  their  feet,  and  had  taken  his 
garments,  and  was  set  down  again,  he  said  unto  them,  Know 
ye  what  I  have  done  to  you  ? 

13.  Ye  call  me  Master  and  Lord:  and  ye  say  well;  for  so 
I  am. 

14.  If  I  then,  yoiir  Lord  and  JMaster,  have  washed  your 
feet ;  ye  also  ought  to  wash  one  another's  feet. 

15.  For  I  have  given  you  an  example,  that  ye  should  do 
as  I  have  done  to  you. 

IG.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you.  The  servant  is  not 
greater  than  his  lord ;  neither  he  that  is  sent  greater  than 
he  that  sent  him. 

17.  If  ye  know  these  things,  happy  are  ye  if  ye  do  them. 

Ts  it  not  somewhat  surprising  that  there  could  be  the  least  oc- 
casion to  suggest  that  this  transaction  was  intended  as  an  exam- 
ple? Why  did  not  every  disciple  catch  the  spirit  of  it  at  once, 
and  feel  the  power  of  its  rebuke  of  his  own  selfishness?  We  must 
conclude  that  the  temper  of  the  disciples  on  the  point  here  in- 
volved was  far  on  toward  the  opposite  pole — utterly  unlike  what 

Jesus  desired  and  was  laboring  to  inculcate. Do  ye  understand 

what  I  have  been  doing  ?  Ye  call  me  your  Lord  and  your  Mas- 
ter [Teacher]  ;  so  for,  well;  for  I  am. Ah,  did  they  realize  how 

high  he  stood  above  them  in  purity,  in  dignity,  and  in  glory  ? 
Did  their  minds  take  in  at  all  adequately  the  moral  force  of  this 
transaction  as   done  l)y  the  Infinite  Son   of  God   upon  and   for 

themselves — weak,  vile;  yet  aspiring    and    proud    mortals? 

"  Verily,  verily,  (the  usual  emphatic  words)  I  say  unto  you,  the 
servant  is  not  greater  than  his  lord," — and  should  never  feel 
himself  above  any  service  which  his  lord  is  willing  to  do.  It  is 
one  thing  to  know  this  principle  of  obligation  and  this  rule  of 
duty — quite  another  to  obey  it.  Blessed  is  the  man  who  shall 
do — who  shall  bring  his  very  spirit  and  life  into  harmony  with 
this  law  of  self-sacrificing  service  for  others'  good!  Manifestly 
the  IMaster  felt  a  painful  fear  lest  even  these  most  favored  and 
best  trained  disciples  would  fail  to  take  home  to  their  heart  and 
to  work  into  their  life  this  first  law  of  Christian  living.  Alas  ! 
that  there  should  be  so  much  reason  for  this  fear  as  to  all  his 
professed  disciples,  from  that  day  onward. 

On  the  question,  Wiiat  constitutes  obedience  to  the  example  of 
Jesus    in  washing  his    disciples'  feet?  it  seems  luirdly  necessary 


204  GOSPEL  OF   JOHN.— CIlAr.  XIII. 

to  say — It  lies  in  the  spirit ;  not  in  the  letter.  As  to  the  letter — 
the  mere  outside  act,  the  washing  of  another's  feet  is  an  entirely 
different  matter  now  fi'om'what  it  was  then.  Climate  and  modes 
of  protecting  the  feet  have  made  some  of  this  difference ;  the  usages 
and  ideas  of  social  life  have  made  this  difference  yet  much 
greater.  It  is  simply  preposterous  to  assume  that  obedience  to 
Christ's  example  demands  in  our  age  and  times  the  identical  thing 
which  he  did. — Yet  let  not  this  fact  weaken  our  sense  of  obliga- 
tion to  follow  his  example.  All  that  his  example  meant  then,  it 
means  now.  The  real  service  which  the  law  of  Christ  demands 
of  us  is  not  abated  by  the  least  jot  or  tittle  in  consequence  of  the 
change  in  social  customs  which  renders  it  improper  now  to  wash 
one  another's  feet.  It  were  more  than  a  misfortune  to  lose  the 
sweet  poAver  of  this  divine  exami:>le  ;  it  were  worse  than  a  blunder 
to  miss  its  precious  influence  toward  the  crucifying  of  human  sel- 
fishness and  the  culture  of  Christian  humility  and  of  loving  service 
toward  all  the  Christian  brotherhood. 

18.  I  speak  not  of  you  all:  I  know  whom  I  have  chosen  : 
but  that  the  Scripture  may  be  fulfilled,  He  that  eateth  bread 
Avith  me  hath  lifted  up  his  heel  against  me. 

19.  NoAV  I  tell  you  before  it  come,  that,  AA'hen  it  is  come 
to  pass,  ye  may  believe  that  I  am  he. 

20.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  He  that  rccciveth 
Avhomsoever  I  send  receiveth  me;  and  he  that  receiveth  me 
receiveth  him  that  sent  me. 

"  I  speak  not  of  you  all  " — for  there  is  one  among  you  Avhose 
heart  is  not  Avith  me  but  against  me.  "I  know  whom  I  liaA'c 
chosen;"  he  is  not  one  of  them.  In  this  apostasy  the  scripture 
is  fulfilled  Avhich  long  since  said;  "He  that  eateth  bread  Avith 
me" — bound  therefore  to  me  in  most  sacred  bonds  of  friendship 
— hath  turned  aAvay  from  me,  lifting  his  heel  against  me  in  ruth- 
less violation  of  all  duty  and  honor. The  scripture  referred  to 

here  is  Ps.  41 :  9, — said  probably  of  the  treachery  of  Adonijah 
and  his  associates.  (See  my  notes  on  the  Psalm.)  It  was  ful- 
filled in  the  case  of  Judas  in  the  sense  that  this  case  filled  out 
ftilhi  the  A^ery  idea  of  David  in  the  Psalm.    The  same  thing  AA'hich 

befell  DaA'id  befell  David's  greater  Son  also. As  is  quite  common, 

the  connection  between  the  event  and  the  scripture  is  not  that 
Judas  turned  against  Jesus, /o?"  the  sake  of  fulfilling  an  ancient 
scripture  considered  as  a  prophecy,  but  simply  that,  in  this  treach- 
ery, there  Avas  a  filling  out  again  of  the  same  crime  of  heartless 
and  guilty  treason. 

The  reader  Avill  scarcely  need  to  be  reminded  that  in  all  Orien- 
tal lands  the  rights  of  hospitality  are  deemed  most  sacred. 
Whoever  has  eaten  bread  or  salt  Avith  another,  is  pledged  to  eter- 
nal friendship.  The  man  aa^io  should  lift  his  heel  against  a  friend 
with  Avhom  he  had  eaten  at  the  same  table  Avould  doom  himself 
to  the  deepest  infamy. Jesus  forcAvarncd  his  disciples  of  this 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIII.  205 

treachery  in  Judas  that  it  might  not  take  them  by  surprise,  nor 
suggest  the  inquiry — Did  our  Master  fail  to  read  the  heart  of  Ju- 
das, and  -was  he  surprised  in  this  outbreak  of  treachery?  lie 
Avould  have  their  faith  in  him  the  rather  confirmed  by  the  devel- 
opments which  he  had  foreseen. "  lielieve  that  1  am  " — am  all  I 

have  ever  claimed  to  be — the  great  "/  am."  (Hee  John  8  :  58,  and 
8  :  24). 

V.  20  is  doubtless  in  place  here,  and  must  have  some  connec- 
tion of  thought  with  what  precedes  and  follows.     It  behooves  us 

to  inquire  for  this  connection.     May  it  be  this? The  treachery 

of  Judas  is  before  the  mind  of  Jesus.  The  guilt  of  this  treach- 
ery lay  in  the  light  sinned  against,  and  in  the  position  of  high 
honor  and  dignity  from  which  he  had  fallen,  lie  was  one  of 
those  whom  Jesus  had  sent  forth  to  preach  the  gospel.  His  func- 
tions were  of  such  exalted  honor  that  whoever  should  receive 
him  would  virtually  receive  Jesus  himself.  To  receive  Jesus  was 
equivalent  to  receiving  the   Infinite   Father  who  had  sent  him. 

From  this  high  brotherhood  of  relationsliips  with  the  Son  of 

God  and  with  the  Father,  Judas  had  utterly  and  basely  fallen ! 
He  had  shown  himself  to  have  no  appreciation  of  this  high 
honor ;  no  sense  of  the  obligations  it  imposed ;  no  heart  in  sym- 
pathy with  its  exalted  service.  Thirty  j^ieces  of  paltry  silver 
weighed  more  with  him  than  all  this  ! 

21.  When  Jesus  had  thus  said,  he  was  troubled  in  spirit, 
and  testified,  and  said,  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  that 
one  of  you  shall  betray  me. 

"Troubled  in  spirit" — the  same  word  we  met  in  the  scenes  at 
the  grave  of  Lazarus  (John  11:  3-3) — indicating  deep  and  painful 
emotion — it  seemed  so  inexpressibly  sad  that  one  of  his  chosen 
twelve — one  who  had  sat  beside  him  at  table ;  was  sitting  (per- 
haps) next  him  at  this  moment — who  had  been  lifted  so  high  in 
privilege  and  honor,  and  in  the  possibilities  of  a  noble  life,  should 

turn  against   him  in  the   foulness  of  the  basest   treason  ! It 

should  engage  our  thoughtful  notice  that  the  deep  emotions  of 
Jesus  were  not  (apparently)  indignation  toward  such  meanness, 
nor  resentment  in  view  of  such  treachery ;  but  unspeakable  pity 
and  sorrow  over  this  fearful  fall !  "One  of  you"  whom  I  have 
loved  so  tenderly,  and  ministered  unto  so  long — one  of  you  must 
go  down  to  an  unutterably  hopeless  perdition,  and  make  a  total 
wreck  of  his  own  well-being  forever !  As  the  story  is  recited  by 
Matthew  and  Mark,  Jesus  had  this  fearful  ruin  vividly  in  mind: 
"  Woe  to  that  man  by  whom  the  Son  of  man  is  betrayed !  Good 
were  it  for  that  man  if  he  had  never  been  born  !  " 

The  time  had  come  for  Jesus  to  announce  this  sad  foct  to  his 
yet  faithful  disciples — but  wc  notice  he  approaches  it  gradually, 
not  calling  out  Judas  at  once  by  name,  but  saying  with  the  usual 
solemn  asseveration — "  One  of  you  shall  betray  me."  It  was  no 
doubt  morally  Avholesome  to  put  the  matter  first  in  this  indirect 


206  GOSPEL  OF  JOPIN.— CHAP.  XIII. 

way.     Jt  wakened  them  to  earnest  thinking  and  to  personal  self- 
examination. 

22.  Then  the  disciples  looked  one  on  another,  donbting  of 
Avhom  he  spake. 

23.  Now  there  was  leaning  on  Jesus'  bosom  one  of  his 
disciples,  Avliom  Jesns  loved. 

24.  Simon  Peter  therefore  beckoned  to  him,  that  he 
should  ask  who  it  should  be  of  whom  he  spake. 

25.  He  then  lying  on  Jesus'  breast  saith  unto  him,  Lord, 
who  is  it? 

26.  Jesus  answered.  He  it  is,  to  whom  I  shall  give  a  soj), 
when  I  have  dipped  it.  And  Avhen  he  had  dipped  the  sojo, 
he  gave  it  to  Judas  Iscariot,  the  son  of  Simon. 

The  other  evangelists  present  this  scene  with  some  variations 
and  Avith  more  or  less  additional  circumstances.  Matthew  (26  : 
21-25),  and  Mark  (14  :  18-21)  make  very  prominent  the  agony  of 
sorrow  and  solicitude  Avhich  this  announcement — "  One  of  you 
shall  betray  me  " — brought  upon  their  souls.  "  Thej^  were  exceed- 
ing sorrowful  and  began  every  one  of  them  to  say  vmto  him — 
'•Lord,  is  it  1?"  As  they  relate  the  case,  Jesus  answered  their 
inquiry  and  pointed  out  the  traitor  by  saying  (as  in  Matthew) 
"  lie  that  dippcth  his  hand  with  me  in  the  dish,  the  same  shall 
betray  me;  "  and  in  Mark — "  It  is  one  of  the  twelve  that  dippeth 
with  me  in  the  dish."  Luke  treats  these  points  in  a  less  specific 
way,  giving  only  the  general  statement. — "  The  hand  of  him  that 
betrayeth  me  is  with  me  on  the  table"  (22:  21).  These  slight 
variations  by  no  means  impair  the  general  accuracy  of  these  in- 
dependent narratives.- Only  John  brings  out  his  own  special 

agency  in  identifying  Judas.  How  could  John  ever  forget  these 
facts?  He  sat  next  to  Jesus  on  the  right,  almost  leaning  into  his 
bosom,  therefore  in  a  condition  to  put  his  question  in  an  under- 
tone— to  which  Jesus  seems  to  have  given  his  reply  so  audibly  as 
to  be  heard  by  all  at  the  taljle.  It  is  plausibly  supposed  that  Ju- 
das sat  next  to  Jesus  on  his  left,  so  that  Jesus  could  readily  pass 
to  him  the  morsel  of  bread  ("  sop")  after  dipping  it  in  the  com- 
mon dish.  This  near  position  of  the  traitor  at  this  table  gives 
special  emphasis  to  the  words — "  He  that  eateth  bread  with  me;  " 
"  lifted  up  his  heel  against  me  ;  "  "  one  of  you  " — among  the 
nearest  to  my  person,  and  one  among  the  most  honored.  Alas, 
that  he  should  betray  me,  and  go  away  to  a  doom  at  once  so 
guilty,  so  hopeless,  so  dreadful ! 

Throughout  this  book  John  is  wont  to  designate  himself  as 
"  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved."     (See  John  19:  26,  and  20:  2, 

and  21 :  7,  20,  24). Assuming  that  this  descriptive  phrase  came 

from  John  himself,  what  shall  we  say  of  the  spirit  it  manifests  ? 
Is  it  assuming  and  consequential,  as  if  John  would  suggoet  the 
high  distinction  which  he  enjo^'cd  in  the  esteem  and  love  of  his 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIII.  207 

^fiistor?  Or  is  it  really  modest  and  humble,  the  author  purposely 
iinplyini;;  that  the  marvel  of  his  life  had'  been  that  Jesus  could 
love  such  a  man  as  he  ?  Or  does  the  phrase  make  no  special 
manifestation  of  John's  spirit,  resting  upon  the  simple  fact  thiit 
being  a  relative,  an  early,  and  in  the  main  a  stoadfost  disciple,  he 
had  enjoyed  a  very  special  intimacy  with  Jesus  ? Of  these  al- 
ternatives, the  first  is  too  revolting;  the  second  is  admissible  and 
pleasant  to  admit;  the  third  is  not  specially  objectionable. 

27.  And  after  tlie  ?op  Satan  entered  into  liim.  Then 
said  Jesus  unto  him,  That  thou  doest,  do  quickly. 

28.  Now  no  man  at  the  table  knew  for  Avhat  intent  he 
spake  this  unto  him. 

29.  For  some  of  them  thought,  because  Judas  had  tlie 
bag,  that  Jesus  had  said  unto  him.  Buy  those  things  that  we 
have  need  of  against  the  feast ;  or,  that  he  should  give 
something  to  the  poor. 

30.  He  then,  having  received  the  sop,  Avent  immediately 
out ;  and  it  was  night. 

"  Satan  entered  into  Judas,"  talcing  advantage  of  the  open  door 
to  his  soul,  for  this  exposure  fired  up  his  resentment  and  made 
him  desperate.  Now  (said  the  devil  to  him)  you  may  as  well 
strike ;  you  can  never  go  back ;  all  confidence  in  you  is  lost 
here;  get  the  money  while  you  can — and  Judas  thought  so  too. 
- — —The  next  steps  were  all  downward.  Jesus  simply  remarked 
— "That  thou  doest,  do  quickly."  The  eleven  were  not  in  the 
secret;  and  speculated  to  small  purpose  Avhat  the  Master  could 
mean.  Judas  went  immediately  out,  to  close  the  arrangement 
with  the  priests;  night  set  in;    the  dread  event  came  on  apace. 

Will  it  be  a  useful    study  of   human  nature  to  pause  here  a 

moment  over  this  Judas  Iscariot  ? We  naturally  ask:    What 

kind  of  a  life  had  he  lived  since  his  call  to  be  a  disciple  and 
his  public  enlistment  into  the  service  of  Jesus?  Nothing  ap- 
pears on  the  record  of  its  earlier  stages  to  mark  him  as  the  fu- 
ture apostate  ;  nothing  to  show  that  the  eleven  suspected  him 
rather  than  any  otlier  one  of  their  numl)er  when  Jesus  as- 
tounded them  by  declaring,  "One  of  you  shall  betray  me."  It 
is  supposable  that  he  had  thought  most  of  the  earthly  side  of 
^Messiah's  kingdom  ;  looked  for  a  good  time  in  Jerusalem  when 
Jesus  should  take  his  throne  there,  and  perhaps  had  felt  dis- 
couraged of  late  by  the  opposition  and  by  the  slow  pi-ogress  in 
the  line  of  his  hopes.  We  may  also  consider  that  Satan  helps 
such  professors  to  keep  up  a  fair  appearance,  to  rein  in  their 
earthward   propensities,  or  at    least  the  manifestntion  of   them. 

Perhaps  Judas  enjoyed  the  society  of  good,  kind  brethren; 

had  some  relish  for  the  social  side  of  their  Christian  life,  and 
having  committed  himself  to  Christ  in  hope  of  selfish  good,  did 
not  see  his  way  clear  to  withdraw  without  dishonor.     So  he  may 


208  GOSPEL   OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIII. 

have  managed  to  keep  up  appearances  though  heartless  as  to  all 

real  syuapathy  with  the  spirit  of  his  Master. Are  there  not 

such  professed  followers  of  Jesus  in  the  churches  of  our  age  ? 

But  why  did  not  his  better  impulses  recoil  from  betraying 

his  Master  ? Satan  has  his  ways  of  keeping  in  the  back- 
ground the  revolting  aspects  of  sin.  He  may  have  whispered 
to  the  soul  of  Judas  after  this  manner  :  The  enterprise  of  your 
Master  is  not  as  hopeful  as  you  expected ;  he  manages  badly  for 
the  best  success;  the  money  does  not  come  in  well  and  you  are 
scarcely  paid  for  your  services ;  j'ou  need  a  little  more  money 
very  much,  and  ought  to  have  it.  Besides,  if  Jesus  goes  into 
their  hands,  he  can  easily  get  ovit  again  by  vising  his  miraculous 
powers.  You  have  not  been  quite  well  treated  and  may  prop- 
erly take  some  redress,  etc. The  other  side  of  the  case  was 

somehow  strangely  kept  in  the  dark — the  kindness  he  had  ex- 
perienced from  his  Master;  the  love  that  had  been  shown  him ; 
his  positive  conviction  that  Jesus  was  not  only  innocent  but  un- 
selfish, benevolent,  worthy  of  his  deepest  gratitude  and  his  purest 
love  and  service;  the  unutterable  wrong,  sin,  and  shame  of  turn- 
ing against  so  good  and  glorious  a  Friend — to  all  these  thoughts 
he  was  strangely  oblivious.  But,  oh,  how  did  they  come  rush- 
ing  upon    his    poor  soul  after  the    awful   deed  was   done  ! 

Alas!  is  there  any  deception  like  that  of  sin?  Is  there  any  folly 
and  madness  possible  to  human  souls  like  this  Avhich  Satan  fos- 
ters and  Avorks  into  force  upon  the  human  will  till  the  sin  is 
past  and  only  its  horrors  remain  ! 

31.  Therefore,  when  lie  was  gone  out,  Jesus  said,  Xow  is 
the  Son  of  man  glorified,  and  God  is  glorified  in  him. 

32.  If  God  be  glorified  in  him,  God  shall  also  glorify  hiin 
in  himself,  and  shall  straightway  glorify  him. 

When  Judas  had  gone  out,  the  mind  of  the  Master  instantly 
grasped  the  coming  result — the  betrayal,  the  arrest,  the  death  of 
agony,  and  what  is  specially  to  be  noted,  the  ultimate  fruit — 
glory  to  God  and  supreme  exaltation  for  his  Son.  It  is  refresh- 
ing to  note  that  these  remotest  results  came  to  the  front  in  his 
prospective  view  of  his  death,  and  that  he  saw  them  so  near  at 
hand — "  shall  siraighiicai/  glorify  him." 

33.  Little  children,  yet  a  little  Avhile  I  am  with  you.  Ye 
shall  seek  me ;  and  as  I  said  unto  the  Jews,  Whither  I  go, 
ye  can  not  come ;  so  now  I  say  to  you. 

Not  dazzled  in  the  least  for  an  instant  by  this  prospective 
glory,  his  thoughts  of  love  and  tenderness  return  to  the  dear  ones 
before  him  :  "  Little  children,"  I  must  leave  you  soon.  A  sense 
of  loneliness  and  desolation  will  come  over  you,  I  know ;  ye  will 
seek  me  and  long  for  the  return  of  such  precious  hours  of  fel- 
lowship as  we  have  enjoyed;  but  ye  can  not,  for  a  time,  come 
where  I  am  to  be.     Nothing  remains  for  you.  but  to  pass  your 


GOSPEL   OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  XIII.  209 

remaining  life  on  earth  withont  my  bodily  presence.  To  pre- 
pare you  better  for  this  earthly  lii'c,  1  have  many  things  to  say. 

34.  A  new  commandment  I  give  mito  you,  That  ye  love 
one  another ;  as  I  have  loved  you,  that  ye  also  love  one 
another. 

35.  By  this  shall  all  men  know  that  ye  are  my  disciples, 
if  ye  have  love  one  to  another. 

These  expi'essive  words,  so  full  of  wisdom  and  of  love,  should 
be  considered  in  the  light  of  that  recent  disturbance  of  feeling, 
"  the  strife  among  them  which  should  be  accounted  greatest," 
and  the  ambition  of  James  and  John  to  have  first  scats  in  his 
kingdom — which  had  stirred  the  indignation  of  the  other  ten 
disciples.  It  would  be  most  dangerous,  nay  more,  ruinous  even 
to  their  cause,  if  such  jealousies  should  supplant  their  mutual 
love,  after  their  Master  should  have  passed  away.  They  abso- 
lutely must  hold  together  in  the  spirit  of  real  love  for  each  other 
— such  love  as  Jesus  had  felt  and  shown  for  them — or  their  work 
must  utterly  fail.  Such  love  would  show  the  world  that  they 
Avere  disciples  of  Jesus,  for  the  world  never  meets  such  love 
elsewhere  than  among  his  followers.  The  philosophies  and  wis- 
doms of  earth  have  always  failed  to  beget  such  fraternal  love 
in  human  society — and  always  will.  Reasonably,  therefore,  will 
sensible  men  for  evermore  infer  that  such  mutual  love  proves  dis- 
cipleship  in  the  school  of  Christ.  It  is  therefore  intrinsically  one 
of  the  great  vital  powers  of  Christianity,  working  internally  to 
augment  the  solid  strength  of  Christian  bodies;  and  working  ex- 
ternally to  enforce  the  conviction  upon  the  world  that  such  love 
of  brethren  is  heaven-born,  and  witnesses  with  all  the  force  of 
demonstration  that  these  loving  souls  are  Christ's  disciples. 

3G.  Simon  Peter  said  unto  him,  Lord,  whither  goest  thou? 
Jesus  answered  him,  Whither  I  go,  thou  canst  not  follow  me 
now  ;   but  thou  shalt  follow  me  afterwards. 

37.  Peter  said  unto  him,  Lord,  why  can  not  I  follow  thee 
now  ?     I  will  lay  down  my  life  for  thy  sake. 

38.  Jesus  answered  liim,  Wilt  thou  lay  down  thy  life  for 
my  sake  ?  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee,  The  cock  shall 
not  crow,  till  thou  hast  denied  me  thrice. 

These  words  of  Peter  connect  themselves  logically  with  what 
Jesus  had  said  (v.  33)  of  going  away.  Perhaps  the  intervening 
words  about  loving  one  another  did  not  arrest  his  attention — at 
least  they  did  not  divert  it  from  that  previous  remark  by  Jesus 

about  going  away  from  his  disciples. He  is  curious  to  learn 

tchere  Jesus  proposed  to  go.  Jesus  intimates  that  his  going 
Avould  be  by  death,  and  that  Peter  might  come  to  him  at  some 
future  time.  The  ardor  of  Peter's  soul  may  be  seen  in  the  feel- 
ing— Why  may  I  not  follow  thee  noic  ?      llow  can  I  endure  to 


210  GOSPEL   OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIV. 

live  here  without  thee  ?    I  am  ready  to  die  for  thy  sake. Ah! 

Peter,  those  noble  impulses  lack  the  solid  base  and  the  firmness 
of  purpose  which  exj^erience,  culture,  trial,  and  grace  may  yet 
give.      There  are  deeds  in  thy  nearer  future    that  will  astound 

thy  friends  and  thyself! How  he  felt  Avhen  Jesus  forewarned 

him  of  his  fall  we  are  not  told.  It  should  have  made  him  watch- 
ful, self  distrustful,  prayerful.     We  fear  it  failed  of  these  results. 

Probably  he  was  perplexed  and  scarcely  believed  it. It  is  sup- 

posable  that  the  words  passed  somehow  out  of  his  mind — until 
that  "  look  "  of  Jesus  which  brought  the  cock-crowing  to  mind, 
and  this  admonition  too,  and  made  him  weep — oh,  most  bitterly  ! 


CHAPTER    XIV. 

This  chapter  reports  the  conversations  of  Jesus  with  the  eleven 
at  the  supper-table  Avhere  they  ate  the  Passover,  until  they  ad- 
journed to  go  over  the  Kidron  to  the  garden  of  Gethsemane. 

The  great  central  fact  which  shapes  this  entire  discourse  is  that 
Jesus  is  soon  to  be  parted  from  them,  leaving  them  to  do  battle 
for  his  cause  alone.  Hence  it  became  vital  to  minister  moral 
strength  to  their  faith  ;  to  open  more  fully  before  them  the  blessed- 
ness of  the  future  life ;  to  give  them  new  light  and  new  promises 
as  to  pra3'er,  and  not  least,  to  reveal  to  them  the  mission  and  work 
of  the  Comforter;  and  in  the  same  connection,  to  assure  them  of 
fresh  manifest.ations  of  himself  and  of  God  the  Father,  condi- 
tioned upon  their  steadfast  obedience  to  his  commands.  Such, 
therefore,  is  the  general  current  of  thought  in  this  precious 
chapter. 

1.  Let  not  your  heart  be  troubled :  ye  believe  iu  God,  be- 
lieve also  in  me. 

The  death  of  Jesus  wovild  naturally  fill  their  hearts  with 
ti'ouble — not  grief  only  for  the  loss  of  one  so  honored  and  so 
dear,  but  anxiety,  trouble  in  view  of  their  own  personal  danger; 
in  view  also  of  the  responsibilities  of  their  work  and  of  the  sud- 
den withdrawal  of  One  upon  whom  they  had  been  wont  to  lean 
so  absolutely  and  with  such  sAveet  confidence.  Therefore  Jesus 
admonishes  them  "not  to  let  their  hearts  be  troubled."  It  is 
their  privilege  to  trust  in  God  and  in  himself,  as  truly  and  as  fully 

as  ever,  and  indeed  far  more  fully  than  ever  yet. In  the  last 

clause  of  the  Averse  the  Greek  verb  for  "  believe,"  being  repeated 
in  precisely  the  same  form  with  reference  to  "  God  "  as  to  "  me  "  [Je- 
sus] may  grammatically  be  either  indicative  or  imperative  ;  so  that 
we  may  translate  it  in  either  of  the  three  following  ways  :  (1 )  Both 
indicative; — Ye  do  believe  in  God;  ye  do  believe  in  me: — (2) 


t 


GOSPEL  OF   JOIL\.-CIIAP.  XIV.  211 

Both  imperative; — Believe  ye  in  God  ;  believe  ye  also  in  me: — 
or  (3)  Either  of  the  two  indicative  and  the  other  imperative  ; 
i.  e.  Either — Ye  do   believe  in  God ;  believe  ye  also  in  me ;  or 

Believe  ye  in  God  ;  ye  do  believe  in  me. The  best  is  the  second 

of  these  alternatives,  making  both  clauses  imperative; — Believe 
ye  in  God ;  believe  ye  also  in  me.  They  needed  this  exhortation 
to  more  faith  in  both  God  the  Father  and  God  the  Son.  So  far 
as  appears  there  is  no  reason  to  assume  that  their  faith  in  God 
Avas  already  perfect,  so  that  they  only  needed  to  bring  up  their 
faith  in  Jesus  to  the  same  perfection.  To  interpret  thus — As  yo 
already  believe  in  God  as  fully  as  need  be,  so  give  your  confi- 
dence in  like  fullness  to  me — rests  on  nothing  in  their  previous 
history  or  experience,  and  is  therefore  gratuitous.  It  is  better  to 
interpret  the  exhortation  as  urging  equally  and  alike  more  faith 
in  God  and  more  faith  in  Jesus. 

2.  In  my  Father's  house  are  many  mansions :  if  it  were 
not  so,  I  -would  have  told  you.  I  go  to  prepare  a  place  for 
you. 

3.  And  if  I  go  and  prepare  a  place  for  you,  I  will  come 
again,  and  receive  you  unto  myself;  that  where  I  am,  there 
ye  may  be  also. 

The  course  of  thought  is — I  must  leave  you;  but  it  is  only  for 
a  short   time.     Indeed   one   object  in  my  goin^  is  to  prepare  a 

place  where  we  may  dwell  together  forever. "In  my  Father's  " 

[great]  "  house  are  many  mansions  " — places  of  abode — not  pre- 
cisely equivalent  to  palaces  as  if  the  leading  idea  were  magnifi- 
cence, splendor;  but  places  for  permanent  abode  where  we  may 

dwell  together. There  was  none  of  the  coldness  of  formality, 

none  of  the  resei've  of  a  half  distrustful  friendship,  manifested 
in  saying — "  If  it  were  not  so,  I  would  have  told  you."  I  with- 
hold nothing  from  friends  so  dear  which  it  is  important  for  them 

to  know. The  best  textual   authorities   read — "  I  would   have 

told  you,  for  I  go  to  prepare,"  etc. "If  I  go  " — the  woi'd  "//" 

not  implying  the  least  doubt  as  to  his  going.  It  is  equivalent  to 
saying,  "  When  I  shall  have  gone  and  prepared  a  place  for  you,  I 

will  come  again  and  receive  you  to  myself" This  must  refer 

to  Christ's  coming  in  the  death  of  his  saints.  At  and  in  their 
death  he  comes  to  receive  their  souls  to  himself,  to  bear  them  up 
to  his  Father's  mansions  where  he  has  prepared  a  place  for  them 
that  they  may  be  where  he  is.  This  passage  has  great  impoi'tance 
because  of  its  bearing  upon  the  true  sense  in  which  Jesus  speaks 
of  coming  to  his  people — or  rather  I  would  say — upon  one  of  the 
senses  in  Avhich  he  was  to  come  again,  for  there  are  other  comings 
besides  this.* 

"Many  mansions" — but  for  whom?  Observe,  Jesus  does  not 
say  many  mansions  for  you — does  not  imply  that  the  mansions 

*  See  this  subject  treated  more  fully  in  the  Appendix. 


212  GOSPEL  OF   JOHN.— CHAP.  XIV. 

previously  there  were  prepared  and  intended  for  his  redeemed 
people.  It  should  be  considered  that  these  disciples  had  heard 
of  angels  in  heaven,  "beholding  always  the  face  of  the  F'ather," 
and  they  might  also  have  heard  of  various  orders  of  unfallen 
beings — "  principalities  and  powers  in  the  heavenly  places."  It 
Avas  pertinent  therefore  for  Jesus  to  suggest  that  his  Father's 
house  had  mansions  for  all  these,  and  that  still  there  was  a  place 
also  for  his  disciples  which  he  would  put  in  order  for  their  re- 
ception. 

This  brief  but  rich  allusion  to  the  future  reunion  of  Christ's 
people  with  himself  should  not  be  passed  without  a  few  moments' 
attention  to  its  salient  points — as  e.  g. 

(I.)  It  has  definite  localiii/ — in  ojiposition  to  the  notion  that 
heaven  has  no  locality ;  means  nothing  but  happy  existence,  with 
not  the  least  regard  to  place. 

(2.)  As  to  place  where,  we  learn  nothing  here  save  what  is  in- 
cidentally implied,  viz,  that  this  place  prepared  for  Christ's  peo- 
ple is  in  the  same  great  house  of  our  Father  in  which  are  the 
mansions  for  we  know  not  how  many  orders  and  families  of  his 
unfallen  children.  Jesus  testifies  that  there  are  many  such  man- 
sions, and  more  than  intimates  that  he  will  fit  up  yet  other  places 
of  abode,  of  the  same  sort,  for  the  new  accessions  gathered  by 
his  grace  from  the  fallen  sons  of  earth.  So  much  then  as  to  the 
future  home  of  his  people  we  may  regard  as  made  certain. 

(3.)  The  notion  that  the  future  abode  of  Jesus  with  his  people 
is  to  be  on  this  earth  after  it  shall  have  been  purified  by  the  final 
conflagration,  is  not  only  unsupported  by  revelation,  but  is  in  di- 
rect conflict  with  this  testimony  from  Christ.  "We  can  afford 
therefore  to  dismiss  it  to  its  place  among  the  fancies,  thankful 
that  something  at  once  better  and  surer  is  provided. 

(4.)  It  should  be  spoken  of  gratefully  that  this  very  brief  al- 
lusion to  the  heavenly  place  carries  in  it  the  best  possible  elements 
of  blessedness;  viz.  being  loith  Jesus  where  he  is.  Let  this  be 
enough  for  us  to  know.  Nothing  could  be  better.  May  we  not 
almost  say — Nothing  can  add  to  the  blessedness  of  this  com- 
panionship and  ever-abiding  presence.  It  matters  little  to  us 
where  among  the  celestial  bodies  of  the  boundless  universe  the 
locality  may  be ;  what  its  relations  in  space  maybe  to  other  worlds  ; 
what  its  surroundings  ;  what  its  possibilities  of  acquaintance  with 
the  vast  universe  of  matter  or  of  created  mind.  The  one  all-com- 
prehensive fact,  itself  suflicicnt  though  it  were  alone,  will  be  that 
this  everlasting  home  is  to  be  icith  Him  we  love,  with  him  who 
hath  loved  us ;  who  wears  our  nature  and  takes  us  to  himself  as 
his  redeemed  brethren. 

4.  And  W'hither  I  go  ye  know,  and  the  way  ye  know. 

5.  Thomas  saith  unto  him,  Lord,  we  know  not  whither 
thou  goest ;  and  hoAV  can  we  know  the  way  ? 

6.  Jesus  saith  unto  him,  I  am  the  way,  the  truth,  and  the 
life:  no  man  cometh  unto  the  Father  but  by  me. 


GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIV.  213 

Ye  must  surely  understand  ere  this  that  I  refer  to  my  own 
death  as  the  going,  and  to  heaven  as  the  place  whither.  Ye 
must  therefore  know  the  toay  by  which  human  beings  reach  that 

other  world. Noticeably  the  thought  of  Jesus  is  not  at  all  upon 

the  direction  in  space,  or  the  convoy  of  agencies  for  transportation, 
or  attendants  upon  this  transit  from  earth  to  heaven: — nothing 
of  this  sort.  He  thinks  only  of  the  "ica;/,"  taken  in  its  spiritual 
sense,  /.  e.  of  himself  as  the  only  way  to  that  blessed  life  above. 
He  had  already  illustrated  the  same  truth  under  the  figure  of 
"the  door"  into  the  sheep-fold,  and  had  taught  it  in  plainest 
terms  by  the  promise  of  everlasting  life  to  those  who  believe  in 
himself—^ — "Way;"  "truth;"  "life" — abstract  terms  of  most 
comprehensive  import.  1  am  myself  the  "ivaij,"  for  only  by  and 
through  me  can  men  reach  that  blessed  state.  I  reveal  all  truth; 
I  give  all  real  life.     No  man  cometh  to  the  Father  save  by  me. 

In  V.  4  the  Sinaitic  and  Vatican  manuscripts  (whom  Tisch- 

endorf  follows)  give  the  text;  "Whither  1  go,  ye  know  the  way." 

Thomas  in  reply  made  two  points ;  the  place  whither  and  the 

way  by  which,  and  said  that  not  knowing  the  first  they  could  not 
understand  the  second.  Jesus  adds  nothing  more  respecting  the 
place  whither,  but  answers  to  the  more  important  point — the  way 
to  gain  it. 

7.  If  ye  liad  known  nic,  ye  slioukl  have  known  my  Father 
also :  and  from  henceforth  ye  know  him  and  have  seen  him. 

8.  Philip  saitli  unto  him,  Lord,  shew  us  the  Father,  and 
it  sufficeth  us. 

9.  Jesus  saith  unto  him,  Have  I  been  so  long  time  with 
you,  and  yet  hast  thou  not  known  me,  Philip?  he  that  hath 
seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father;  and  hoAV  sayest  thou  then, 
Shew  us  the  Father? 

Twice  in  this  connection  Jesus  had  spoken  of  the  Father;  in 
V.  2,  of  his  Father's  house  as  their  own  future  abode  with  their 
Lord  Jesus ;  in  v.  6,  as  one  to  whom  they  must  needs  come 
through  himself; — but  did  they  really  know  this  Father?  Jesus 
tacitly  assumes  that  they  do  not — at  least  that  they  needed  a  yet 
deeper  and  more  full  knowledge  of  him.  Therefore  he  says — 
"  If  ye  had  known  me  thoroughly,  ye  would  have  known  my 
Father  also."  From  henceforth,  since  I  have  revealed  myself  to 
you  so  fully — since  I  have  shown  and  am  about  to  show  you  the 
depths  of  my  heart  of  love,  yc  will  know  the  Father  and  may  con- 
sider that  ye  have  seen  not  me  only  but  him. Philip  does  not 

quite  understand  these  allusions  to  the  Father.  In  saying — 
"  Lord,  show  us  the  Father  and  it  sufficeth  us,"  he  may  perhaps 
have  had  his  mind  upon  the  case  of  Moses — "I  beseech  thee,  show 
me   thy  glory;"  when   the  Lord   replied — "T  will  make  all  my 

goodness  pass  before  thee,"  etc.  (Ex.  33:  18-23). "  It  sufficeth 

us" — breathes  a  precious  spirit.     If  only  we  may  have  such  reve- 
10 


214  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIV. 

lations  of  the  Fathei'  as  thou,  our  heavenly  Teacher,  canst  surely 
give,  it  shall   be  enough  for  us;  it  will   meet   the  greatest  and 

most    deeply  felt  want    of  our  souls. The  answer   of  Jesus 

is  perfectly  definite  and  lucid,  and  also  entirel}''  in  point.  I 
have  been  with  you  a  long  time,  and  hast  thou  not  known  me, 
Philip  ?  If  thou  hast  really  seen  me,  thou  hast  seen  the  Father. 
I  am  the  very  manifestation  of  the  Father  to  men.  My  words, 
my  character,  my  life,  reveal  to  men  nothing  save  what  is  in  the 
Father  also — omit  nothing  that  is  in  him.     The  revelation  I  make 

of  the  Father  is  therefore  perfect. The  truth  taught  here  has 

immense  significance.  Jesus,  the  revea-ler  of  God  the  Father  to 
men;  the  perfect  representation  of  the  Father's  character;  of  the 
Father's  love,  of  the  Father's  compassion  for  sinners,  of  his  in- 
terest in  their  salvation,  of  his  love  for  the  penitent  and  believ- 
ing ;  of  his  patience,  sympathy,  tenderness,  and  eternal  faithfulness 

to  all  his  promises  in  their  behalf. It  is  one  of  the  infirmities 

of  the  human  intelligence  that  its  conception  of  a  God  never  seen 
by  human  eyes — never  brought  near  in  his  distinct  personality, 
but  revealed  only  in  his  works  of  nature,  his  agencies  of  provi- 
dence, his  written  word,  and  such  testimonies  as  he  may  give  to 
man's  inner  consciousness,  should  seem  indefinite,  dim,  cold,  dis- 
tant. How  wonderfully  do  all  our  conceptions  of  God  become 
distinct,  clear,  vivid  and  intensely  impressive  when  we  have  him 
brought  before  our  very  eyes  and  home  to  our  souls  in  the  person 
of  the  incarnate  Jesus!  As  seen  in  Jesus  Christ,  God  meets  us  in 
all  the  varied  moods  of  our  inner  and  outer  life ;  in  every  variety 
of  circumstances;  in  sorrows  and  in  joys;  in  darkness  and  in 
light;  in  depressions  and  doubts,  and  no  less  in  our  days  of  trust 
and  peace : — for  with  the  life  of  Jesus  before  us  and  taught  to 
see  God  in  this  life,  Ave  have  the  very  Father  himself  brought 
home  to  our  mind's  conception  and  to  our  heart's  sensibility  in 
every  possible  phase  in  which  we  can  need  to  see  or  feel  a  present 
God.  O  how  near  we  come  to  the  Great  Father  when  we  are  in- 
troduced to  him  by  his  incarnate  Son,  our  human  brother!  How 
definite  and  precious  may  our  thoughts  of  him  become  when  we 
understand  that  we  may  shape  them  upon  the  model  of  Jesus, 
made  manifest  in  human  flesh ! 

10.  Believest  tliou  not  that  I  am  in  the  Father,  and  the 
Father  in  me?  the  words  that  I  speak  unto  you  I  speak  not 
of  myself;  but  the  Father  that  dwelleth  in  me,  he  doeth 
the  works. 

11.  Believe  me  that  I  can  in  the  Father,  and  the  Father 
in  me :  or  else  believe  me  for  the  very  works'  sake. 

The  form  of  question  seems  to  imply  that  Jesus  had  said  this 
before,  and  that  Philip  ought  to  have  believed  it.  Art  thou  still 
slow  of  heart  to  believe  what  thou  hast  heard  from  my  lips  al- 
ready— "that  I  am  in  the  Father  and  the  Father  in  me"  ?  (chap. 
10:  38).     The  same  expression  occurs  subsequently  (14:  21,  and 


GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIV.  215 

17:  21,  23). Xo  human  language  can  be  framed  to  express  a 

closer  relation  than  these  words  express — "I  in  the  Father,  and 
the  Father  in  me."  It  has  been  well  said  that  the  most  intimate 
relationships  known  to  human  society  fall  below  this ;  for  we  never 
say — The  patient  is  in  his  physician;  or  the  client  in  his  advo- 
cate; never  that  the  soldier  is  in  his  commander;  the  pupil  in  his 
teacher; — never  that  the  parent  is  in  his  child  nor  the  child  in  his 
parent.  These  human  relationships  give  us  precious  illustrations 
of  trust,  confidence,  sympathy,  affection; — but  the  great  depth  of 
oneness,  reaching  almost  to  the  point  of  complete  identity — such 
as  this  language  gives  us — finds  no  adequate  illustration  in  hu- 
man relationship,*.  How  much  it  does  in  fact  mean,  who  can 
tell?  Where  all  human  analogies  fail  us,  our  conceptions 
are  (may  we  not  say?)  necessarily  feeble  and  imperfect. 

The  definite  points  that  follow  are  tangible.  "  The  Avords  that 
T_  speak  unto  you,  I  speak  not  of  myself."  Jesus  had  often  in- 
sisted upon  this  point — that  he  came  among  men  to  speak,  not 
on  his  own  authority,  but  on  that  of  his  Father — words  not  only 
concerning  God,  hnt  from  God — the  very  words  the  Father  had 

given  him  to  speak. So  also  of  his  "icorks" — The  Father  who 

dwelleth  in  me,  doeth  these  miraculous  works  which  are  wrought 
through  my  voice  and  hand.* 

Again  Jesus  adduces  his  miracles  to  confirm  the  testimony  of 
his  personal  word:  "Believe  me" — my  own  declaration — "that 
I  am  in  the  Father  and  the  Father  in  me ;"  or  if  you  ask  more 
and  higher  testimony,  believe  me  on  the  ground  of  these  miracles — 
("  for  the  very  works'  sake"). 

12.  Verily,  verily,  T  say  unto  you,  He  that  believeth  on 
me,  the  works  that  I  do  shall  he  do  also  ;  and  greater  worh 
than  these  shall  he  do  ;  because  I  go  unto  my  Father. 

The  double  asseveration,  "Yerily,  verily,"  implies  as  usual 
that  Jesus  here  advances  to  a  new  announcement  of  special  so- 
lemnity and  importance.  What  is  it?  Especially,  what  are  these 
"works"  which  believers  shall  do,  the  same  essentially  as  his  own, 
and  even  greater  ?  And  what  are  the  force  and  bearing  of  the 
reason  assigned — "Because  I  go  to  the  Father"? 

In  the  antecedent  context  the  "works"  spoken  of  include  mir- 
acles unquestionably.  We  need  not  say— denote  miracles  to  the 
exclusion  of  all  other  works,  but  they  obviously  include  miracles 
and  make  them  prominent  as  testimony  from  the  Fathei-.  Does 
Jesus  mean  to  say  that  his  believing  people  will  work  miracles 
equal  to  his  own,  and  even  greater? 

In  the  decision  of  this  question  the  points  to  be  considered  are 
these : 

*Tlie  better  sustained  text  has  it— not  ^^  the  works,"  -but  "his 
works" — in  the  sense — his  own  works  arc  wrought  by  and  through 
me. 


216  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAr.  XIV. 

(1.)  That  in  the  passage  where  Jesus  first  speaks  of  his  "  works  " 
in  relation  to  the  Father's  (John  5  :  17-25),  these  "  works  "  include 
the  raising  of  dead  souls  to  new  spiritual  life  as  well  as  the  work- 
in"'  of  miracles  in  the  natural  world.  Therefore  the  idea  of 
spiritual  works,  wrought  in  the  realm  of  the  spiritual  life,  is 
not  foreign  from  the  thouglit  of  Jesus  in  the  usage  of  this  term 
"tvorJcs." 

(2.)  That  subsequent  to  his  resurrection  and  ascension  his  be- 
lieving disciples  did  perform  miracles  in  the  natural  world  as 
well  as  works  of  converting  power  in  the  spiritual  world.  The 
power  to  work  miracles  was  definitely  promised  them  (Mark  16: 
17,  18).  Yet  it  must  be  said,  there  is  no  intimation  that  these 
miracles  were  to  be,  or  actually  were,  "greater"  than  those 
wrought  by  Jesus  in  person. 

(3.)  The  reason  given — "Because  I  go  to  the  Father" — must 
look  to  the  promise'd  gift  of  the  Spirit.  This  gift  was  made  di- 
rectly contingent  upon  his  going:  "It  is  expedient  for  you  that 
I  go  away  ;  for  if  I  go  not  away,  the  Comforter  will  not  come  unto 

you;  but  if  I  go  away,  I  will  send  him  unto  you"  (16:  7). 

In  the  decision  of  our  main  question,  very  great  force  must  be 
accorded  to  this  last  consideration  because,  standing  as  the  reason 
for  the  greater  works,  it  shows  what  was  specially  present  to  the 

thought  of  Jesus  in  these  words. It  is  therefore  with  special 

regard  for  this  last  consideration  that  I  would  interpret  these 
"  o-reater  works  "  to  mean  the  spiritual  fruits  of  their  labors,  par- 
ticularly as  wrought  by  the  fresh  and  copious  effusions  of  the  Di- 
vine Spirit.  Jesus  had  in  his  eye  the  scenes  of  the  great  Pen- 
tecost and  those  continuous  manifestations  of  the  >5pirit's  power 

of  which  Pentecost  was  the  beginning  and  the  type. Oi  hia 

personal  feelings  in  the  view  of  that  sublime  manifestation  of 
spiritual  power,  we  are  reminded  that  as  John  the  Baptist  said 
of  Jesus — "He  must  increase  but  I  must  decrease,"  and  said  it 
with  no  pain  of  heart  from  the  thought  of  being  eclipsed  by  the 
brio-hter  glory  that  came  after,  somewhat  so,  Jesus  saw  that  the 
HoTy  Ghost,  the  Spirit  of  Truth,  coming  to  take  his  place  as  a  help- 
ful presence  and  power  with  his  people,  would  do  greater  things 
through  those  human  instrumentalities  than  himself  had  wrought. 
He  to^  foresaw  this  with  no  thought  of  sadness  in  being  eclipsed 
by  the  greater  brightness  of  the  new  manifestations.  It  was  in 
h'is  heart  to  honor  the  work  of  the  Spirit.  It  is  always  in  his 
heart  that  we  should  do  the  Spirit  honor.  No  sentiment  in  our 
heart  can  be  more  grateful  to  him — none  more  vital  to  our  spir- 
itual life — none  more  conducive  to  the  triumph  of  truth  and  to 
its  effective  force  on  the  earth. Let  it  then  be  carefully  con- 
sidered that  these  "  greater  Avorks"  to  be  doneby  those  who  be- 
lieve in  Jesus  are  not  supposed  to  be  due  to  improved  methods 
of  Christian  work,  nor  in  any  large  measure  to  progress  made  in 
Christian  doctrine,  nor  to  greater  zeal  in  the  laborers — to  nothing 
in  short  that  is  merely  or  even  mainly  human  and  of  man.  No  ; 
the  reason — "Because  I  go   to  the  Father" — looks   toward   the 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIV.  217 

mission  of  the  Spirit  as  constituting  this  new  accession  of  jjowcr. 
This  fundamentally  is  its  source  and  fountain.  lie  comes  to 
■work  through  human  instruments.  So  Avorking,  he  may  hring 
into  service  better  methods  of  Christian  labor ;  a  purer  Christian 
doctrine;  a  truer  zeal  and  a  more  thorough  self-denial  and  conse- 
cration ; — yet  in  all  this,  "  the  excellency  of  the  power  shall  be 
evermore  of  God  and  not  of  man." 

13.  And  whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  in  jny  name,  that  Vvill  I 
do,  that  the  Father  may  be  glorified  in  the  Son. 

14.  If  ye  shall  ask  any  thing  in  my  name,  I  Avill  do  it. 

It  should  not  surprise  us  that  this  line  of  thought  brings  up 
firaijcr  as  the  next  subject.  Indeed  it  seems  to  me  that  the  better 
punctuation  connects  v.  13  closely  with  v.  12  in  this  sense; 
Greater  Avorks  than  these  shall  he  do  (1.)  Because  I  go  to  my 
Father;  and  (2.)  13ecause,  "whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  in  my  name 
that  will  I  do" — a  second  reason  why  believers  in  Jesus  after  he 
shall  have  gone  to  the  Father  will  do  the  "greater  works  "—viz. 
he  appears  before  the  throne  as  their  Great  Advocate  and  Inter- 
cessor, and  so  will  secure  the  utmost  efficiency  to  believing  prayer. 

These  words — supremely  rich  in  meaning — demand  careful  at- 
tention.    The  points  to  be  considered  are 

1.  That  here  is  "progress  of  doctrine"  in  regard  to  prayer — an 
advance  in  the  agencies  provided  for  prevailing  prayer  and  in  the 
light  which  reveals  them.  It  is  a  new  thing  that  Jesus  the  incar- 
nate Son  is  now  in  heaven,  "  exalted  as  a  Prince  and  Savior  to 
give  repentance  and  remission  of  sins  "  (Acts  5  :  31);  an  Advocate 
with  the  Father;  "a  great  High  Priest  passed  into  the  heavens." 
His  presence  and  agencies  there  are  so  revealed  to  us  that  we  can 
see  intelligently  an  enlarged  foundation  for  richer  spiritual  bless- 
ings in  answer  to  prayer  and  for  greater  assurance  that  they  shall 
be  given. 

2.  What  is  implied  in  asking  in  Jesus'  name  ? That  we  are 

in  sympathy  with  his  work ;  that  we  ask  blessings  upon  his  king- 
dom and  its  interests,  and  not  upon  ourselves  apart  from  that 
kingdom  and  those  interests ;  that  we  plead  on  the  ground  of  his 
worth  and  not  our  own — because  he  is  worthy,  and  not  because 
we  are ;  also  that  he  and  not  Ave  may  be  honored  thereby.  We 
put  his  name  forAvard  and  not  our  own — appearing  at  the  throne 
of  the  Father  (so  to  speak)  behind  that  name  ofJesus  and  not 
otherAvise. 

3.  Bearing  upon  the  mutual  relations  of  the  Father  and  of  the 
Son,  Ave  may  properly  compare  the  passage  before  us  Avith  John 
16:  23;  here,  "  Whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  in  my  name,  that  Avill  I 
do;"  there,  "  WhatsocA-er  ye  shall  ask  the  Father  in  my  name, 
lie  Avill  give  it  you."  The  Father  and  the  Son  are  at  one — in  per- 
fect harmony  in  this  matter  of  ansAvering  prayer  offered  in  Jesus' 
name.  It  Avould  seem  that  each  has  a  common  interest  and  a 
common  agency;  indeed,  that  the  case  is  such  that  these  forms 


218  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— ClIAr.  XIV. 

of  statement  are  essentially  interchangeable — "  what  things  the 
Father  doeth,  those  doeth  the  Son  likewise." 

4.  The  reason  assigned-^"  That  the  Father  may  ])e  glorified  in 
the  Son" — implies  that  the  Father  accoiints  it  his  honor  to  hear 
the  intercessions  of  the  Son ;  to  show  before  the  universe  that  he 
loves  and  honors  the  Son,  and  approves  his  benevolent  self-sacri- 
fice for  man.  The  whole  scheme  of  human  salvation  is  no  less 
truly  an  outgrowth  of  the  Father's  love  than  of  the  Son's. 
While  it  is  said  on  the  one  hand  that  "  God  so  loved  the  world 
that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son,"  it  is  also  said  that  the  Son 
came  to  seek  and  to  save  the  lost — came  under  the  impulses  of 
his  own  infinite  love.  Of  this  self-sacrificing  love  the  Father  de- 
lights to  show  his  approbation. The  appropriate  inference  from 

this  is — that  all  prayer,  honestly  made  in  the  name  of  the  Son, 
will  be  surely  and  joyfully  answered  by  the  Father  because  he 
loves  to  honor  his  Son,  and  to  glorify  himself  before  the  universe 
thereby. 

5.  But  there  will  arise  the  question  of  limitation  as  to  things 
that  may  be  asked  in  Jesus'  name.  What  shall  we  say  of  the 
apparently  unlimited  "  awj  thing"  ?  Does  this  promise  authorize 
Christians  to  ask  aiii/  thing  they  icill,  with  the  certainty  that  it  will 
be  granted  ? 

In  my  view  this  promise  carries  with  it  its  own  limitations — 
all  there  are — all  there  need  be.  The  blessings  sought  must  be 
blessings — not  cui'ses ;  must  be  such  as  can  be  asked  in  Jesus' 
name — for  the  glory  of  God  in  the  scheme  of  human  salvation. 
No  provision  whatever  is  made  under  this  promise  for  men  to  ask 
for  Avhat  are  blessings  only  in  the  seeming,  and  to  "  consume  upon 
their  lusts."  The  condition  of  asking  in  Jesus'  name  utterly  pn-e- 
cludes  all  those  things  fi-om  the  class  of  subjects  appropriate  for 
this  prayer.  Countless  things  of  an  earthly  nature — health,  pro- 
longed life,  food,  raiment,  comforts  of  varied  sort — these  may  be 
prayed  for  in  sympathy  with  ClirLst,  for  the  ends  of  his  kingdom 
according  to  our  honest  judgment;  and  if  God  should  judge  as 
we  do,  he  will  grant  them;  otherwise,  we  ought  not  to  wish  him 
to  do  so.  If  our  heart  is  in  sympathy  with  his  kingdom,  we 
shall  of  course  defer  sweetly  to  his  wisdom  in  all  such  subjects  of 
prayer.  Those  things — a  large  class — which  on  the  great  whole 
mag  be  or  may  not  be  blessings,  must  find  their  necessary  limita- 
tion in  God's  wisdom.  But  those  things  which,  in  their  very 
natm-e,  must  be  blessings,  and  never  can  be  evils,  fall  entirely 
within  the  range  of  this  promise.  If  we  ask  them  in  true  sym- 
pathy with  Jesus,  asking  really  in  his  name,  so  that  in  giving  them 
the  Father  may  be  glorified  in  the  Son,  they  are  sure.  This 
promise,  therefore,  is  as  free  from  limitation  as  we  ought  to  wish ; 
is  as  broad,  as  rich,  as  sure,  as  it  can  be  reasonable  for  us  to  de- 
sire. 

15.  If  ye  love  me,  keep  my  commandments. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAR  XIV.  219 

16.  And  I  will  jiray  the  Father,  aiid  he  shall  give  you 
another  Comforter,  that  he  may  abide  with  you  for  ever ; 

17.  Ei'cn  the  Spirit  of  truth;  Avhom  the  world  can  not 
receive,  because  it  seeth  him  not,  neither  knoweth  him:  but 
ye  know  him;  for  he  dwelleth  with  you,  and  shall  be  in 
you. 

Toward  a  superior,  obedience  is  the  natural  outgrowth  and  ex- 
pression of  love.  The  i:)rofession  of  love  avails  nothing  Avithout 
it.  In  this  case,  as  between  Jesus  and  his  disciples  in  every  age 
of  time,  lie  is  the  superior,  with  infinite  right  to  command. 
Consequently  there  is  always  infinite  reason  why  his  people 
should  render  to  him  the  love  of  their  heart,  and  the  natural  ex- 

jiression   of   this  love   in  the  fullest  obedience. There  is  yet 

another  view  of  the  case.  Jesus  has  work  to  be  done  by  his  peo- 
ple. The  same  salvation  which  has  blessed  their  souls  so  abun- 
dantly, he  would  have  them  carry  (instrumentally)  to  other  souls, 
that  they  also  may  in  like  manner  be  blessed.  As  Jesus  rejoiced 
Avith  great  joy  in  giving  to  them  these  blessings  of  his  dying  love, 
so  does  he  long  with  great  longing  to  see  like  blessings  borne  to 
other  souls.  This  is  the  work  to  which  he  calls  his  people.  By 
all  the  love  they  bear  to  their  own  Savior ;  by  all  the  gratitude 
they  feel  toward  him  for  their  own  salvation  ;  by  all  the  sympa- 
thy they  have  in  his  enterprise  of  saving  a  Avorld  from  its  sins — 
they  arc   bound  most  sacredly   to   "  keep   his  commandments." 

In  view  of  the  circumstances  of   his  disciples  then  present, 

Jesus  Avould  say,  I  am  to  leave  you  and  go  away.  If  in  my  ab- 
sence 3'e  would  express  your  love  to  me,  this  is  tlie  way  to  do  it — 
"  Keep  my  commandments  ;  "  conform  your  heart  and  life  to  my 
expressed  Avill ;  perform  Avith  all  diligence  the  Avork  I  giA'e  you  to 
do ;  spare  no  pains  to  understand  Avhat  my  will  concei'ning  you 
is  that  ye  may  do  it.  This  is  the  requital  I  ask  for  all  the  great 
blessings  I  haAe  given  you;  this  the  testimony  I  look  for  of  your 
love  to  me. 

Note  further  :  This  injunction  of  obedience  stands  here  as  the 
condition  of  a  special  promise.  "  Keep  my  commandments  ;  "  so, 
or  then,  on  this  condition,  "  I  will  pray  the  Father  in  your  be- 
half, and  he  Avill  give  you  another  Comforter." 

We  have  reason  for  the  deepest  interest  in  learning  all  we 
can  respecting  this  promised  Comforter.  Our  sources  of  knoAvI- 
edge  as  to  his  mission  and  Avork  are — (1)  The  names  given  him: 
"Comforter,"  "Spirit  of  truth,"  "Holy  Spirit,"  etc. — (2)  The 
functions  assigned  him — things  he  is  said  to  do: — e.  g.  To 
"dAvell  Avith  you  and  be  in  you;"  to  "abide  Avith  you  forever;" 
to  "teach  you  all  tilings  and  bring  all  things  to  your  remem- 
brance AA'hatsoeA-er  I  have  said  unto  you"  (14:  26);  to  "guide 
you  into  all  truth  and  shoAV  you  things  to  come"  (16:  13);  in 
the  Avords  of  Jesus,  "He  shall  testify  of  me"  (15:  26);  "he 
shall  glorify  me,  for  he  shall  receive  of  mine  and  shall  shoAV  it 
unto  you"  (16;    1.3,  14). — (?>)  That  he  shall  lie  ''another  Com- 


220  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIV. 

forter "  as  compared  with  Jesus  himself,  in  this  res^iect  filling 
the  place  left  vacant  by  Jesus  when  he  -withdrew  his  personal 
presence.  As  Jesus  was  to  them  a  perpetual  comforter,  so  shall 
the  Spirit  of  truth  become  their  comforter,  being  to  them  a  sec- 
ond Jesus — a  successor  to  Jesus,  filling  his  place  permanently  to 

the  end  of  the  ATorld. So  much   Jesus  taught  respecting   the 

Comforter  during  the  conversations  of  this  eventful  night. 

The  word  chosen  here  as  the  leading  name  for  the  divine  Spirit 
— "  Comforter  " — Is  specially  adapted  to  the  circumstances  of  the 
disciples,  then  to  be  left  in  a  sort  of  orphanage.  They  would 
need  consolation.  They  had  been  blessed  with  a  Friend  whose 
w^ords  were  always  sustaining,  consoling,  cheering,  morally  brac- 
ing to  the  soul.  By  his  words  of  sj'mpathy,  counsel,  caution, 
sometimes  of  reproof,  they  had  been  sustained  and  kept  during 
the  years  of  their  pupilage  under  him.  When  he  should  leave 
them,  they  would  need  another  such  Comforter.  Hence  it  was  fit- 
ting not  only  that  Jesus  should  provide  one,  but  that  he  should  pre- 
sent him  under  this  name,  that  they  might  look  to  the  Spirit  for 
the  same  sympathy,  counsel,  consolation,  which  they  had  been 
wont  to  obtain  from  Jesus  himself 

The  Greek  word,  translated  "  Comforter,"  is  sometimes  trans- 
ferred into  our  language — Paraclete.  The  primary  sense  of  the 
root  is  to  call;  the  sense  of  this  compound  with  para,  is  to  speak 
on  terms  of  intimacy  [?6';7/i],  and  hence  to  speak  kindly,  to  one's 
comfort  and  consolation  in  trouble :  also  to  instruct  and  to  ad- 
monish or  reprove,  in  cases  where  the  truest  friendship  would  re- 
quire it. Furthermore,  the  Avord   is  used   of  one  Avho   speaks 

not  only  fa  ns  in  intimate  friendship,  but /or  us  la  another  as  an 

advocate,  intercessor. Such   are   fundamentally  the   functions 

of  the  Spirit  as  indicated  by  the  name  "  Comforter." It  should 

be  noted  that  these  are  his  functions  toward  Christians,  the  fol- 
lowers of  Jesus.  Toward  the  world — toward  men  in  their  sins, 
his  work  is  not  that  of  comfort,  consolation ;  but  of  reproof,  re- 
buke, conviction,  as  we  shall  see  (John  IG:  8-11). It  Avill  be 

readily  seen  that  the  descriptive  points  which  define  his  service 
for  true  disciples  coincide  entirely  Avith  the  significance  of  this 
descrijDtive  name — Paraclete,  Comforter. 

Let  it  be  noted,  moreoA-er,  that,  as  said  here,  Jesus  prays  to 
the  Father,  and  the  Father,  in  ansAvcr  to  his  prayer,  gives  the 
Comforter.  In  another  passage  (14:  2G)  Jesus  says — "Whom 
the  Father  Avill  send  in  my  name;"  and  in  yet  another  (15:  2G), 
"  Whom  1  will  send  unto  you  from  the  Father;  "  and  also  (IG  : 
7),  "If  I  depart,  I  Avill  send  him  unto  you."  These  A'arious  modes 
of  expression  are  seen  to  be  in  harmony  AA'hen  Ave  consider  that 
the  Father  and  the  Son  act  jointly  and  co-ordinately  in  the  send- 
ing of  the  Spirit.  In  certain  a.«pects  the  sending  may  be  ascribed 
to  the  Father;  in  certain  other  aspects  to  the  Son.  Apparently 
the  most  precise  statement  is  this  in  the  passage  before  us — Jesus 

praying,  and  the  Father,  in  answer  to  his   prayer,  sending. 

The  great  discussion  of  the  Middle  Ages — Avhether  the  Spirit  pro- 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  XIV.  221 

cecds  fi-om  the  Father  and  from  the  Son,  or  only  from  the  Father, 
has  been  m(jstly  logomachy — a  mere  war  of  words.' 

This  Comforter  is  to  "  abide  with  you  forever" — a  ministration 
wliich  shall  continue  to  the  end  of  the  world — not  to  be  closed 
as  my  personal  ministrations  in  the  flesh  are  to  be  by  my  death. 

This  presence  of  the  Spirit,  men  of  the  world  "  can  not  re- 
ceive," because  they  neither  see  nor  know  him.  So  long  as  tlie 
spirit  of  the  world  rules  in  their  souls,  they  have  no  heart — i.  e. 
they  care  not  either  to  see  or  to  know  him.  This  docs  not  say 
that  they  might  not  have  his  presence  if  they  sought  it:  might 
not  hear  his  voice  if  they  Avould  listen  to  it  reverently  and  obey 
it  honestly.  It  simply  means  that  in  the  spirit  of  tlie  world — 
i.  e.  of  selHshi^ess  and  sin — of  pleasure-loving  and  seeking — they 
give  no  ear  to  the  Spirit;  never  put  themselves  in  commviniou 
with  his  presence ;  have  no  heart  for  his  teaching  and  counsel ; 
know  him  not. But  ye,  my  disciples,  know  him,  for  he  is  in- 
finitely near  to  you,  dwelling  within  you,  abiding  in  you. 

This  blessed  truth  of  Christian  experience  found  its  early  illus- 
tration from  the  case — very  familiar  to  all  Jewish  Christians — of 
the  Shechinah — the  visible  glory  of  God  in  their  ancient  temple. 
Under  this  figure,  the  Christian  body  became  a  temj^lc  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  He  dwelt  in  this  temple,  as  of  old  the  glory  of  God 
reposed  above  the  mercy-seat  beneath  the  cherubim,  in  the  deep 
recesses  of  the  most  holy  place. 

18.  I  Avill  not  leave  you  comfortles.s :  I  will  come  to  you. 

Where  t!ie  Greek  has  the  word  "  orphanous,"  equal  to  orphans, 
our  translators  put  it  "  comfortless,"  to  keep  up  the  harmony  with 
the  word  "  Comforter."  Orphans  gives  the  more  exact  sense. 
They  would  be  as  children  left  alone  in  the  world — father  dead, 
mother  dead.  But  Jesus  would  not  leave  them  so.  "  I  will  come 
to  you,"  he  said — said  it  manifestly  with  reference  t'o  sending  the 
Spirit  to  dwell  with  them  as  a  near  and  dear  and  perfect  Friend. 
The  Spirit  would  fill  the  place  of  his  own  presence.  They  would 
have  no  occasion  to  regret  the  change  by  which  Jesus  should  go 
(bodily)  and  the  Spirit  come  (spiritually). 

19.  Yet  a  little  wliHe,  and  the  world  seeih.  me  no  more  ; 
but  ye  see  me  :  because  I  live,  ye  shall  live  also. 

It  was  but  a  little  while  and  death  would  remove  his  bodil}'- 
presence.  Then  the  world  with  their  e3^e  would  see  him  no  more. 
Ye  (said  he  to  his  disciples)  will  see  me  still — not  with  the 
eye  of  flesh,  hut  with  the  eye  of  the  inner  soul.  Yet  strictly 
speaking,  this  vision  of  Jesus  is  by  means  of  the  Spirit,  of  v/hicli 
Jesus  said  in  this  very  discourse — "lie  shall  receive  of  mine  and 
shall  show  it  unto  you.  He  shall  testify  of  me ;  he  shall  bring 
all  things  to  your  remembrance  whatsoever  I  have  said  unto  you." 
No  work  of  the  Spirit  in  the  souls  of  God's  people  is  made  more 
prominent  in  these  discourses — none  can  be  in    itself  more  vital 


222  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAR   XIV. 

and  precious— than  to  reveal  Jesus.  His  perfect  ability  to  set  all 
truth  respecting  Jesus  in  beams  of  sun-light  before  the  Christian's 
thought  and  apprehension  qualifies  him  for  this  service.  Jesus 
might  fitly  say  of  those  who  had  these  clear  and  impressive  rev- 
elations, "Ye  see  me." Such  seeing  bears  home  to  the  soul  a 

vivifying  spiritual  power.  "  Because  I  live,  ye  shall  live  also." 
Because,  though  I  go  away  in  death,  this  dj'ing  is  not  ceasing  to 
be — is  not  ceasing  to  act  and  to  fill  all  the  functions  of  real  life, 
but  is  rather,  to  rise  to  a  mightier  life-power  and  to  a  more 
blessed  existence.  Because  I  receive  this  great  accession  of  life- 
forces  in  my  ascension  to  the  Father,  so  shall  ye  live  also,  with 
life  renewed  and  mightily  invigorated  and  intensified.  The  gift 
of  the  Spirit  shall  breathe  new  life  into  your  souls.  Ye  need  not 
fear  that  my  death  on  the  c-ross  is  destined  to  lessen  my  power 
to  sustain  and  to  comfort  you  in  your  Christian  life,  for  it  will 
rather  bring  to  3"0U  a  quickened  life,  of  intenser  energy  and  richer 
blessedness. 

20.  At  that  day  yc  shall  know  that  I  am  in  my  Father, 
and  ye  in  me,  and  I  in  you. 

This  passage  has  special  interest  on  two  grounds:  (a.)  That  it 
places  side  by  side  the  relation  of  Jesus  to  the  Father  on  the  one 
hand  and  to  liis  people  on  the  other,  implying  some  degree  of  an- 
alogy between  these   respective   relationships. If  we  inquire 

more  deeply  into  the  points  contemplated  in  this  analogy,  we 
need  be  in  no  doubt  that  it  looks,  at  least  in  part,  towards  the 
spiritual  life — a  precious  union  of  heart,  a  relationship  of  sym- 
pathy and  love. Does  it  look  also,  more  fundamentally,  toward 

some  analogy  in  the  relationship  of  being,  comparing  Jesus  re- 
lated to  God  as  a  son  on  the  one  side,  with  Jesus,  related  to  his 
people  as  a  brother  on  the  other  side  ?    Who  can  tell  ? 

(5.)  The  other  point  of  interest  in  the  passage  lies  in  the  Avord 
"kuoiv."  "At  that  day  ye  shall  know."  It  will  be  a  new  knowl- 
edge, known  before  but  poorly  and  imperfectly  if  at  all.  Ese- 
getically  we  must  find  the  significance  of  this  knowledge  in  the 
line  of  the  speaker's  thought  as  brought  out  particularly  in  vs. 
21,  23: — "I  will  love  him,  and  will  manifest  myself  to  him." 
"  My  Father  will  love  him,  and  ice  will  come  unto  him  and  make 
our  abode  with  him."  Under  the  light  and  inner  glory  of  such 
manifestations — Jesus  to  the  believing  and  obedient  soul;  Jesus 
and  the  Father  also,  to  every  such  loving  and  obedient  one,  even 
to  the  extent  of  coming  to  him  and  abiding  with  him — the  soul 
thus  visited,  not  with  manifestations  onl}^  but  with  the  very  pres- 
ence of  the  Son  and  of  the  Father — can  not  but  knotc,  as  said 
here,  both  that  Jesus  is  in  the  Father  and  also  in  his  people.  It 
is  the  knowledge  of  experience,  using  this  word  in  its  broadest 
sense — a  knoAving  that  comes  of  the  witnessing  presence  of  God 
in  Christ  to  the  human  soul. 

21.  He  that  hath  my  commandment.'',  and  keepeth  them. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIV.  223 

he  it  is  that  loveth  me:  and  he  that  loveth  mc  yhall  be 
loved  of  my  Father,  and  I  will  love  him,  and  will  manifest 
myself  to  him. 

To  "have  the  comraandments"  of  Jesns  implies  careful  study, 
diligent  inquiry  and  docility.  To  "keep  them"  involves  the 
true  spirit  of  obedience — the  one  deep,  changeless  purpose  to  do 
all  his  known  will.  This  is  the  legitimate  evidence  of  true  love 
to  Christ,  lie  can  accept  no  lower  evidence  than  this;  but  he 
will  most  joyfully  accept  this  evidence,  and  give  every  obedient, 
loving  soul  the  testimony  that  he  accepts  it.  This  is  what  he  de- 
clares here.  "  He  that  loveth  me  shall  be  loved  of  my  Father," 
or  as  said  most  directly  in  v.  23 — "My  Father  will  love  him,"  for 
the  Father  rejoices  greatly  to  see  his  Son  honored  truly  and  loved 
with  the  love  of  honest  obedience.  "I  also  will  love  him,  and 
will  manifest  myself  to  him" — causing  him  to  knoiv  that  I  love 
him;  revealing  to  him  my  face  and  favor;  answering  his  prayer; 
renewing  his  spiritual  strength ;  witnessing  by  my  Spirit  to  the 

love  I  bear  him. Of  course  the  fulfillment  of  this  promise  lies 

in  the  field  of  human  consciousness  and  personal  experience. 
Each  Christian  must  learn  its  inner  meaning  for  himself  alone. 
Inasmuch  as  to  manifest  is  to  shoiv — to  cause  one  to  see — there- 
fore for  Jesus  to  manifest  himself  is  to  make  himself  seen  and 
known.  Consequently,  this  revelation  must  be  made  to  each  in- 
dividual soul,  for  himself  to  see  and  not  for  another;  also  to  see 

for  himself  and  not  for  any  other. A  statement  essentially  the 

same  yet  somewhat  more  full,  Ave  have  in  v.  23. 

22,  Judas  said  unto  him,  not  Iscariot,  Lord,  how  is  it 
that  thou  wilt  manifest  thyself  unto  us,  and  not  unto  the 
world  ? 

This  other  disciple  hearing  the  name  Judas — (the  "Jude"  of  the 
Epistles) — to  be  broadly  distinguished  from  Iscariot  who  was  not 
there  and  was  never  to  be  among  the  chosen  again — could  not 
understand  how  Jesus  would  show  himself  to  his  disciples  and 
not  to  the  world.  He  was  grasping  some  new  idea  about  an  in- 
ward manifestation,  not  visible  to  the  godless  eye,  and  jy^et  the 
mystery  puzzled  him.  How  could  it  be  ?  Fortunately  this  ques- 
tion brought  to  them  from  the  Lord  a  renewed  statement  of  es- 
sentially tlie  same  truth,  yet  with  clearer  light  upon  some  of  its 
aspects. 

23.  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him,  If  a  man  love  me, 
lie  will  keep  my  words,  and  my  Father  will  love  him,  and 
Ave  Avill  come  unto  him,  and  make  our  abode  Avith  him. 

Observe  (a.)  The  natural  connection  between  love  and  obedi- 
ence is  put  here,  as  compared  with  v.  21,  in  ncAV  form: — there; — 
"  He  that  hath  my  commandments  and  keepeth  them,  he  it  is 
that  loveth  me:"'  he7-e — "If  a  man  love   me,  he  Avill   keep  my 


224  GOSPEL  OF  JOIIN.-CIIAr.  XIV. 

■words,  '     The  fact  is  the  same — but  in  other  form  of  stiitemcnt. 

(b.)  Jesus  had  said  before — "I  Avill  love  him:"  here,  only — 

"The  Father  -will   love  him." (c.)  Instead  of  the  -word  used 

before — "manifest" — he  says  here;  "will  come  unto  him  and 
make  our  abode  with  him."  This  new  form  of  statement  was  ob- 
viously designed  to  answer  the  question  put  by  Jude — "JIoio  wilt 
thou  manifest  thyself  to  us  and  not  to  the  world?"  We  will 
come  to  him  and  dwell  with  him.  You  can  surely  understand 
that  a  man  will  easily  learn  to  know  those  who  come  to  him  and 
live  with  him;  "abide  with  him;"  give  him  their  every  day  pres- 
ence; their  constant  communion.  If  a  man  can  not  know  thor- 
oughly and  intimately  those  who  come  and  abide  with  him  in  all 
the  intimacies  of  every-day  life,  what  can  he  know? The  mys- 
tery of  the  point  IToio  f  as  it  lay  in  the  mind  of  Jude,  here  is  no 
attempt  to  explain  to  men  of  the  world  that  they  might  under- 
stand it.  It  was  enough  to  explain  it  to  Jude  and  to  the  dis- 
ciples— an  explanation  equally  good  for  all  disciples  in  every  age. 
Every  disciple — loving  and  obedient — will  know  what  these  mani- 
festations mean  when  Jesus  and  his  Father  shall  come  to  him 
and  make  their  abode  with  him;  when  they  shall  become  inex- 
pressibly near  to  his  conscious  spirit;  when  he  shall  knoio  the 
presence  of  Jesus  and  the  presence  of  the  Father ;  when  the 
spirit  of  adoption  is  living  and  strong  in  his  heart  whereby  he 
says  spontaneouslj^ — Father;  Father. 

It  Avill  be  readily  seen  that  this  promise  is  put  on  one  definite 
condition,  viz.  love  and  obedience — that  love  which  begets  obe- 
dience. Every  believer  who  has  such  love  as  begets  and  insures 
honest  obedience  to  Christ's  commandments — including  both 
knowing  and  keeping — has  this  promise  to  claim  as  his  own. 
It  is  made  sure  to  him.  No  promise  in  the  sacred  word  is  stated 
more  definitely;  none  is  connected  with  its  one  condition  more 
simply  and  closely;  none  is  therefore  more  easily  understood  and 
more  readily  made  available. 

We  should  greatly  wrong  ourselves  if  we  were  to  pass  these 
words  of  Jesus  without  taking  special  note  of  what  he  says  of 
himself  and  of  the  Father  as  bearing  upon  his  true  dimnitij,  and 
yet  distinct  jyersotialiii/.  Perhaps  we  shall  see  this  better  if  Ave 
make  the  supposition  that  Jesus  is  only  a  distinguished  human 
teacher,  of  the  same  sort  as  Peter  and  John.  Then  on  this  sup- 
position, we  should  be  forced  to  ask — What  can  he  mean  by 
claiming  for  himself  the  love  and  obedience  of  his  people  in  the 
same  sense  and  degree  in  which  love  and  obedience  are  claimed 
for  God  the  Father?  What  can  he  mean  by  promising  to  mani- 
fest himself  to  his  loving  and  obedient  friends  in  such  ways  as 

the  world  can  not  see  and  cannot  know? By  what  authority 

can  he  promise  that  such  friends  of  his  shall  be  loved  of  his 
Father,  God  ?  By  what  right  does  he  pledge  to  them  the  Father's 
love  ?  More  still :  Is  it  not  impudent  presumption  in  him  to  put 
himself  on  the  same  level  with  the  Father  and  say — "  We  will 
come  to  him  and  make  our  abode  Avitli  him"  ?    Was  Jesus  com- 


GOSPEL  OF  JOIIX.— CHAP.  XIV.  225 

pctent  to  make  such  pledgos  in  honesty  and  truth  ?  If  so,  then  he 
is  far  more  than  a  merely  human  teaclier.  If  so,  he  can  be  noth- 
ing less  than  the  Infinite  Son  of  God. 

Obsei-ve  also  that  he  does  not  by  any  means  identify  himself 
with  the  Father.  Every  word  of  our  passage  rests  upon  the  as- 
sumption of  distinct  personality.  "I  will  love  him;"  "my 
Father  will  love  him  ;  "  "  ice  will  come  unto  him  and  make  our 
abode  with  him."     If  this  does  not  imply  and  involve  distinct 

personalit}^,  what  human  language  can  ? If  there  is  mystery  in 

the  mutual  relation  of  the  Son  to  the  Father,  be  it  so.  Here  is 
no  attempt  to  explain  the  mystery  ;  but  the  fact  of  distinct  per- 
sonality is  put  in  words  than  which  none  in  our  language — none 
in  any  liuman  language — can  be  plainer. 

24.  He  that  lovetli  me  not  keepeth  not  my  sayings  :  and 
the  word  which  ye  hear  is  not  mine  but  the  Father's  which 
sent  me. 

Statements  of  special  importance  in  the  Scriptures  are  often 
strengthened  by  being  put  in  both  the  positive  and  the  negative 
form.  In  vs.  21,  23,  we  found  the  positive  form;  here,  the  nega- 
tive: "He  that  loveth  me  not  keepeth  not  my  sayings."  The 
non-loving  are  of  course  non-obedient.  I  say  all  this,  not  on  my 
own  authority  alone,  but  on  that  of  my  Father  who  has  sent  me 
— a  statement  often  repeated  by  Jesus,  as  a  thing  never  to  be  for- 
gotten or  left  out  of  account. 

25.  These  things  have  I  spoken  unto  yon,  being  yet  present 
with  you. 

26.  But  the  Comforter,  ivhich  is  the  Holy  Ghost,  whom 
the  Father  will  send  in  my  name,  he  shall  teach  you  all 
things,  and  bring  all  things  to  your  remembrance,  whatso- 
ever I  have  said  unto  you. 

So  much  I  have  said  to  you  while  present ;  the  rest — the  many 
things  more  which  you  will  need  to  know — will  be  taught  you  by 
the  Holy  Ghost.  This  was  the  very  place  and  time  to  put  in 
strong  light  the  work  of  the  Spirit  as  a  Teacher.  He  was  to  sup- 
plement the  teaching  of  Jesus — to  teach  the  many  more  things — 
the  "all  things" — they  might  need  to  know.  Moreover,  he 
would  not  only  reveal  new  truth  as  they  might  be  prepared  for 
its  revelation,  but  he  would  bring  to  their  remembrance  what  Je- 
sus had  said,  recalling  it  for  a  more  full  illustration,  and  a  deeper 
spiritual  impression.  For  it  can  not  be  denied  that  the  disciples 
had  been  dull  and  slow  of  understanding  as  to  many  things  Jesus 
had  said.  Their  previous  misconceptions  of  the  nature  and 
genius  of  his  kingdom  had  often  misled  them,  had  often  darkened 
their  minds,  and  retarded  their  reception  of  the  simple  truths  of 
the  gospel.  The  death  and  resurrection  of  Jesus  struck  down 
many  of  their  cherished  notions,  and  consequently  had  brushed 
away  the  mists  and  clouds  so  as  to  let  in  heaven's  clearer  light. 


226  GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— chap.  XIV. 

Jf  JcMis  had  continued  among  them  after  his  resurrection  not 
forty  days  only,  but  forty  years,  talking  with  them  as  with  the 
two  brethren  on  the  way  to  Emmaus  he  would  hare  done  much 
of  this  work  himself; — but  this  was  not  the  better  plan.  Ascend- 
ing to  heaven,  he  sent  down  the  Spirit  of  truth  on  this  mission 
of  spiritual  instruction— not  by  taking  two  or  three  onl}'  at  once 
— but  myriads  if  need  be  at  the  same  moment; — not  for  forty 
years  only,  but  for  all  the  years  thenceforward  even  to  the  end  of 
the  world. 

^'  27.  Peace  I  leave  witli  you,  my  peace  I  give  unto  you : 
not  as  the  "world  giveth,  give  I  unto  you.  Let  not  your  heart 
be  troubled,  neither  let  it  be  afraid. 

The  only  right  interpretation  of  this  verse  is  the  Oriental — 
that  which  is  based  upon  all  Oriental  usage.  According  to  this 
usage  "peace"  is  the  heart's  benediction — the  utterance  of  loving 
farewell  words ;  expressions  of  earnest  good  will ;  prayer  for  all 
peace  and  prosperity.  The  usage  runs  through  all  Old  Testa- 
ment times  ;  the  salutation,  "Peace"  (shalom)  Ave  hear  often  in 
its  history  of  common  life,  e.  g.  Gen.  43:  23,  and  Judges  19:  20, 
and  1  Sam.  25 :  6,  etc.  Also  in  the  New  Testament,  compare 
Idatt.  10:  13,  and  Luke  10:  5,  6;  Gal.  6:16,  and  Eph.  6:  23.  To 
this  day  the  Arab  gives  his  friends  his  "  salam,"  repeated  and 
still  repeated  according  to  the  fullness  of  his  heart  or  the  homage 
he  pays  to  the  conventional  forms  of  social  life. 

Jesus  says — I  am  about  to  leave  you;  I  give  you  my  blessing; 
I  leave  it  with  you ;  and  mark  this — not  as  the  world  give ;  not  at 
all  in  their  spirit  of  form  and  ceremony;  not  in  words  void  of 
heart,  empty  of  love ;  but  with  overflowing  soul  and  with  abiding 
friendship,  enduring  sympathy,  the  most  tender  concern  for  your 
welfare.  Let  this  suffice  to  sustain  your  souls  under  the  pressure 
of  the  sternest  trial.  Let  not  your  heart  be  troubled  or  afraid. 
Ye  know  my  love  for  j'ou  ;  ye  shall  have  occasion  to  know  my 
power  to  save  and  the  fullness  of  my  promised  consolations. 

28.  Ye  have  heard  how  I  said  unto  you,  I  go  away,  and 
come  again  unto  you.  If  ye  loved  me,  ye  would  rejoice,  be- 
cause I  said,  I  go  unto  the  Father  :  for  my  Father  is  greater 
than  I. 

The  point  of  critical  interest  here  lies  in  the  words — "  My 
Father'  (or  as  in  the  improved  text  "the  Father")  "is  greater 
than  1."  "Greater,"  in  what  sense?  Must  it  necessarily  mean 
"greater"  in  the  essential  elements  of  his  being — i.  e.  of  a 
higher  nature  ;   of  attributes  really  divine — with  the  implication 

that  those  of  Jesus  are  less  than  divine  ? Or  may  these  words 

of  Jesus  mean  in  this  connection,  only  greater  in  2>osition — 
greater  as  being  exalted  above  all  the  incidents  of  such  a  world  as 
this — so  that  for  Jesus  to  go  there  will  be  to  exchange  a  life  of 
sorrow,  humiliation,  trials  manifold,  for  one  of  infinitely  higher 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIV.  227 

diiiiiity  and  blessedness? In  making  our  choice  between  these 

two  possilile  alternatives,  two  things  may  safely  be  said,  and  per- 
haps those  include  all  that  can  be  affirmed  safely. 

(1)  That  the  latter  construction  meets  the  exigencies  of  the  pas- 
sage ;  i.  e.  it  gives  a  good  reason,  and  doubtless  the  true  reason,  why 
they  should  rejoice  in  his  going  to  the  Father.  In  his  going  they 
could  not  rejoice  on  their  own  account,  so  far  forth  as  their  own 
interest,  pleasure,  comfort,  were  concerned;  hut  for  his  sake 
they  would  rejoice,  because  to  him  this  going  to  the  Father  would 
be  exaltation  in  place"  of  humiliation ;  glory  instead  of  shame ; 
bliss  forever,  and  no  more  sorrow. Thus  the  logic  of  the  pas- 
sage demands  that  the  word  "greater"  should  refer  to  position, 
and  not  necessarily  to  the  essential  elements  of  being.  Around 
the  Father's  throne  would  be  supreme  dignity  and  glory,  to  wdiich 
the  Son  would  be  at  once  exalted  upon  his  ascension  to  the 
Father.  This  view  is  sustained  fully  by  the  current  of  apostolic 
teaching  in  regard  to  the  ascension  of  Christ  and  the  glory  that 
should  follow. 

(2)  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  by  no  means  apparent  that  the 
other  proposed  construction — The  Father  greater  than  I  in  his  es- 
sential nature — can  meet  the  logical  demands  of  the  context. 
Admit  for  argument's  sake  that  the  sense  is — The  Father  a 
greater  being  than  I  in  his  essential  nature,  would  this  be  any 
more  a  fact  after  the  ascension  of  Jesus  than  before  ?  Would  it 
bring  any  new  accession  of  happiness  to  the  Son  after  his  ascen- 
sion?— i.  c.  would  it  be  any  apparent  reason  why  the  disciples 
should  rejoice  because  Jesus  was  going  to  the  Father? 

29.  And  now  I  have  told  you  before  it  come  to  pass,  that, 
Avheu  it  is  come  to  pass,  ye  might  believe. 

I  have  spoken  thus  freely  of  my  death  and  of  my  subsequent 
ascension  to  the  Father  that  when  ye  shall  see  these  things,  ye  may 
have  the  more  assured  confidence  in  all  1  have  said  and  in  all  that 
I  am.  Thus  when  your  straining  eyes  shall  follow  me  rising  to- 
ward heaven  till  the  opening  cloud  shall  encompass  me  and  take  me 
from  your  sight,  ye  may  return  to  your  work,  not  wdth  waning  but 
Avith  growing  confidence  ;  not  with  deeper  sadness,  but  with  sub- 
limer  joy. 

30.  Hereafter  I  will  not  talk  much  with  you :  for  the 
prince  of  this  world  cometh,  and  hath  nothing  in  me. 

What  I  can  say  to  you  now  must  be  limited  ;  our  time  is  short. 
The  Prince  of  this  Avorld — Satan — is  coming  shortly  :  he  will  find 
no  foothold  in  me;  no  avenue  of  approach;  no  point  open  to  his 
assault;  nothing  upon  which  his  tempting  arts  can  take  hold. 
The  conflict  will  be  on  his  jmrt  desperate ;  but  as  to  the  issue,  we 
have  nothing  to  fear. 

31.  But  that  the  world  may  know*  that  I  love  the  Father; 


228  GOSPEL   OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XV. 

and  as  the  Father  gave  me  comniandmeiit,  even  so  I  do. 
Arise,  let  us  go  hence. 

All  these  things  T  have  said  and  done  that  theATorld  may  know  that 
I  love  the  Father,  and  have  done  all  in  obedience  to  his  command- 
ment. The  sweet  consciousness  of  this  was  the  joy  of  his  soul. 
The  testimony  of  it  he  had  sought  in  all  lionesty  to  bring  before 
men  that  they  might  see  reason  to  accept  his  mission  and  believe 
in  him  to  their  salvation. 

At  this  point,  the  conversation  around  the  passover  table  seems 
to  have  closed.  Preparations  were  soon  made  to  leave  the  city  and 
go  as  usual  across  the  Kidron  to  the  Mount  of  Olives.  The  next 
allusion  to  place  locates  them  in  the  garden  of  Gethsemane.  Yet 
we  infer  from  John  18  :  1  that  the  discourses  recorded  in  chap. 
15  and  16  and  the  prayer  of  chap.  17,  occurred  in  the  city  before 
thcY  left;  but  more  definitely  tvJiere ;  Avhether  in  the  house  in 
which  the  Passover  was  eaten  or  elsewhere,  docs  not  appear. 


CHAPTER    XV. 

The  aim  of  Jesus  in  this  precious  discourse  is  to  impress  upon 
his  disciples  a  sense  of  spiritual  dependence  upon  himself;  to  re- 
veal the  conditions  of  obtaining  from  himself  perpetual  strength; 
to  testify  to  his  love  for  them  and  to  intensify  their  love  to  him- 
self; to'forewarn  them  of  hatred  from  the  world — from  which  he 
passes  to  speak  of  the  great  sin  of  those  who  rejected  him,  clos- 
ing with  a  renewed  allusion  to  the  promised  Comforter  and  to  his 
work,  with  which  their  own  personal  agency  should  co-operate. 

1.  I  am  the  true  vine,  and  my  Father  is  the  husband- 
man. 

2.  Every  branch  in  me  tliat  beareth  not  fruit  he  taketli 
away:  and  every  branch  that  beareth  fruit,  he  purgeth  it, 
that  it  may  bring  forth  more  fruit. 

3.  Now  ye  are  clean  through  the  "word  which  I  have 
spoken  unto  you. 

Inlsa.  5:  1-7  the  Lord's  people  are  put  as  his  vineyard  upon 
which  he  expends  his  care  in  culture,  and  from  which  he  looks 
for  fruit  often  in  vain.  This  figure  is  here  expanded  with  some 
modifications,  especially  that  which  makes  Jesus  the  vine  and  his 
people  the  branches,    bearing  or  not  bearing  fruit  according  as 

they  meet  their  moral  responsibilities. 1  understand  Jesus  to 

call  himself  the  "  true  vine,"  in  the  sense  of  real,  genuine — one 
that    honestly  fulfills  its    legitimate  function  of  nutrition  to  its 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— ciiAr.  XV.  229 

brandies.  Perhaps  ho  meant  to  intimate  that  in  him.sc]f  the  fii:- 
ure  of  vine  and  branch  became  thoroughly  appropriate  to  exprcs-.s 
the  relation  between  himself  and  his  people. 

In  speaking  of  the  treatment  of  the  non-bearing  and  of  the  bear- 
ing branches,  tlie  original  Greek  makes  its  contrast  more  clearly 
and  yet  tersely  than  our  English  version:  thus:  Everjr  non-bear- 
ing branch  he  takethawcnj  ;*  every  branch  that  bearcth,  he  tal<- 
eih  away  from  it;\  i.  e.  taketh  away  the  superfluous  shoots  that 
rob  the  young  fruit-clusters,  abstracting  nutriment  to  give  it  to 
useless  foliage  and  tree-growth.  The  antithesis  between  taking 
away  the  whole  branch  that  promises  no  fruit,  and  taking  away 
from  that  branch  its  superfluous  growths,  is  put  at  once  clearly, 
tersely,  and  forcibly. 

Our  English  has  yet  another  infelicity  in  the  use  of  the  words 
"purge"  (v.  2)  and  "clean"  (v.  3).  The  old  English  word 
"pui'ge"  has  become  obsolete  except  as  it  has  saved  itself  from 
utter  oblivion  by  linking  itself  with  professional  phrases,  e.  g.  in 
the  usage  of  courts  of  law — to  purge  one's  self  is  to  clear  him- 
self of  alleged  offense;  while  in  the  physician's  dialect,  "purge" 
retains  yet  another  and  a  very  definite  significance.     With  these 

exceptions  the  word  has  deceased. Few  English  readers  would 

suspect  that "  clean  "  (v.  3)  means  the  same  as  "purged"  (in  v. 
2),  yet  the  original  gives  us  a  Avord  of  the  same  significance,  from 
the  same  root.  The  connection  of  thought  demands  the  same 
sense— Avhich  in  both  cases  might  better  have  been  put — "  prun- 
cth  " — "pruned" — in  the  sense  of  cutting  away  superfluous  and 
damaging  growths. 

As  bearing  upon  the  use  of  figures  like  this  of  the  vine,  let  us 
note  that  it  is  only  to  carry  out  the  figure  that  a  branch  (one  of 
Christ's  disciples)  is  said  to  be  "■;?(.  me"  (Christ)  and  yet  not 
bear  fruit.  He  might  be  in  Christ  bij profession — numbered  and 
named  among  the  disciples  ;  but  really  in  Christ,  in  the  strict 
sense,  he  could  not  be,  without  bearing  some  fruit.  Indeed,  Je- 
sus himself  afSrms  below  (v.  5) — "  lie  that  abideth  in  me  and  I 
in  him,  the  same  bringeth  forth  much  fruit."- — ■ — In  the  literal 
vine  there  are  often  branches  which  are  not  fruit-bearing.  Cor- 
respondingly, in  the  spiritual  life,  one  might  be: — as  it  should  ap- 
pear to  others'  eyes — in  Christ,  and  yet,  if  he  bore  no  fruit, 
this  fact  would  show  that  for  the  time  at  least,  the  vital,  life-im- 
parting connection  with  Christ  is  suspended.  2Viat  professed 
Christian  should  take  the  warning — not  to  say  the  alarm — lest 
death  supervene. 

The  blending  of  literal  terms  with  figurative  is  seen  (v.  3) ;  "Ye 
are  ^;?-HHe(Z  through  the  icord  which  I  have  spoken  unto  you." 
"Pruning"  is  in  and  of  the  figure;  the  "Avord"  is  of  that  which 
the  figure  represents — the  literal  Christian  heart  or  character. 
Jesus  had  been  pruning  away  the  non-bearing  branches  by  his 
words  of  instruction,  reproof,  correction.     I'he  spoken  words  were 

*  a/QEi,  t  i^aOat^ei. 


230  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XV. 

the  pruning  knife;  but  in  strictness,  the  "  pruning"  is  figure  ;  the 
"■word"  is  literal. — Moreover,  let  it  not  be  thought  to  mar  the 
beauty  or  force  of  this  figure  that  Jesus  himself  does  this  pruning, 
although  in  the  outset  the  Father  is  the  husbandman  and  Jesus 
the  vine.  In  some  aspects  Jesus  is  the  vine;  in  other  aspects  he 
has  the  care  of  the  pruning.  Tlic  figures  of  scripture  are  plain 
and  instructive,  even  although  they  sometimes  fall  short  of  meet- 
ing all  the  demands  of  our  rules  of  rhetoric. 

4.  Abide  in  me,  and  I  in  you.  As  the  branch  can  not 
bear  fruit  of  itself,  except  it  abide  in  the  vine ;  no  more  can 
ye,  except  ye  abide  in  me. 

5.  I  am  the  vine,  ye  are  the  branches.  He  that  abideth 
in  me,  and  I  in  him,  the  same  bringeth  forth  much  fruit; 
for  "without  me  ye  can  do  nothing. 

6.  If  a  man  abide  not  in  me,  he  is  cast  forth  as  a  branch, 
and  is  "withered;  and  men  gather  them,  and  cast  than  into 
the  fire,  and  they  are  burned. 

Here  the  branches  are  thought  of,  mostly,  as  intelligent  and 
morally  responsible — as  personally  active  in  forming  and  main- 
taining in  due  force  the  living  connection  with  Christ  the  vine; 
i.  e.  the  discourse  shades  oil'  gradually  from  the  figure — the  vine- 
branches  in  husbandry — to  the  thing  illustrated  by  the  figure,  viz. 
the  human  soul  as  being  in   Christ.     The   figure,  however,  still 

helps  us  to  apprehend  the  spiritual  fact. The  central  idea  in 

these  verses  is  the  abiding;  the  sustained  life-connection  of  the 
soul  "with  Christ.  As  the  branch,  severed  from  the  parent  vine, 
is  cut  off  from  nutrition,  can  bear  no  fruit  and  dies ;  so  the  soul 
that  abides  not  in  Christ  can  bear  no  fruit — can  not  even  live — 
but  withers,  dies,  is  cut  away,  fit  only  for  burning.  Human  souls, 
abiding  in  Christ,  bear  much  fruit;  severed  from  him,  as  a  branch 
may  be  severed  from  its  parent  stock,  they  can  do  nothing.  The 
sense  of  the  original  in  the  phrase  (v.  5)  "ivitJiout  7i)e  je  can  do 
nothing,"  is  precisely  this; — apart  from  me — severed  from  me 
like  a  branch  cut  off — ye  are  powerless  as  to  spiritual  fruitage. 

The  reader  will  note  that  this  abiding  in  Christ  is  presented 

as  a  moral  duty,  a  thing  of  obligation — proper  to  be  enjoined  by 
command.  Some  of  the  care  and  culture  therefore  devolve  upon 
what  in  the  figure  are  branches,  but  in  reality  are  morally  re- 
sponsible human  souls. 

Let  no  one  pass  these  words — so  richly  freighted  with  precious 
thoxight — truths  most  vital  to  all  Christian  living — without  solemn 
personal  endeavor,  first,  to  comprehend  their  significance;  and 
then,  to  appropriate  all  their  wealth  of  instruction  to  his  own  new 
and  divine  life. 

7.  If  ye  abide  in  me,  and  my  "words  abide  in  you,  ye  shall 
ask  what  ye  Avill,  and  it  shall  be  done  unto  you. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XV.  231 

By  the  most  natural  relations  of  thou2;ht,  Jesus  passes  from 
"abiding  ill  him"  to  prcti/er.  Verily  it  is  chiefly  by  prayer  that 
this  abiding  is  to  be  maintained  and  kept  in  vijj^or.  Prayer  holds 
on  to  the  arm  of  Jesus;  or  more  in  keeping  with  the  figure,  it  is 
the  channel  of  life-sympathy  and  life-power,  corresponding  to  the 
tubes  and  ducts  through  which  the  vital  juices  flow  and  rcflow 
between  A'inc-stock  and  fruit-brancli.  Prayer !  it  lives  on  Christ, 
and  draws  invigorating  force  evermore  from  that  life-fountain. 

The  promise,  standing  here  with  its  condition,  is  complete  in 
both  its  main  jiarts — the  conditions  so  clear  that  none  need  mis- 
take thcni;  the  blessings  promised  so  rich  that  none  need  wish 

them  more  so. As  to  conditions,  we   note  the  slight   change 

which  is  essentially  explanatory — from  "abide  in  me  and  I  in 
you" — to  "abide  in  me  and  7)u/  words  in  you."  While  it  stood 
•'  I  in  3'ou,"  the  human  duty  and  agency  were  less  clear,  for  even 
an  honest,  truth-seeking  heart  might  say — What  can  I  do  to  keep 
('hrist  abiding  in  me  ?  J3ut  when  Jesus  substitutes  "  my  words" 
for  "1,"  we  see  at  once  how  the  thing  is  to  be  done.  We  are  to 
hold  his  words  close  to  our  own  living,  loving  heart;  study  their 
significance ;  absorb  their  living  force  ;  breathe  their  spirit ;  con- 
form our  voluntary  activities  evermore  to  their  demands.  He 
who  loves  Christ's  words  and  keeps  them  in  abiding  force  upon 
his  own  moral  nature  certainly  has  Jesus  himself  abiding  in  the 
heart. 

Fulfilling  these  conditions  "  ye  shall  ask  what  ye  will,  and  it 
shall  be  done  unto  .you."  What  richer  promise  could  the  very 
soul  of  want  frame  for  itself?  What  more  should  the  children 
of  poverty  and  need  desire  than  the  privilege  of  asking  what  one 
will,  to  be  granted  him  ? 

But  is  not  this  promise  too  broad  and  too  rich  for  God  to  make 
and  to  fulfill?  Does  it  not  transfer  too  much  power  to  mortals? 
Who  will  remain  Ruler  of  the  universe  and  jManager  of  all  mun- 
dane things  when  the  whole  sacramental  host  shall  come  np  to  the 
measure  of  this  great  promise  and  every  one  ask  what  he  will — 

(lod  being  pledged  to  grant  it  ? We  may  dismiss  all  fear  lest 

the  Lord  should  make  jiromises,  blind  to  their  possibilities  of  dan- 
ger. In  this  case  the  safeguard  lies  essentially  in  the  conditions. 
"  If  ye  abide  in  me  and  my  words  abide  in  you,"  ye  will  be  most 
entirely  in  harmony  and  sympathy  with  the  will  of  God,  desiring 
what  he  desires ;  valuing  above  all  else  what  he  most  desires  for 
you,  and  desiring  nothing  save  what  will  (as  ye  judge)  meet  his 
approval  and  subserve  his  glory.  If  in  any  point  ye  should  mis- 
judge, God  will  see  it  (as  you  should  wish  him  to  do),  and  with- 
hold it  (as  ye  would  pray  that  he  might).  AVould  not  this  work 
Avell  and  safely  for  God's  kingdom  ? 

8.  Herein  is  my  Father  glorified,  that  ye  bear  much  fruit; 
so  shall  ye  be  my  disciples. 

Standing  in  this  connection,  these  words  seem  to  have  two 
main  objects: — (1)   To    afford  additional  ground  for  confidence 


232  GOSPEL  OF   JOHN.— CIIAr.   XV. 

that  God  will  ansAver  prayer,  doing  for  us  ■whatever  we  ask  Ije- 
cause  to  do  so  is  vital  to  our  bearing  much  fruit: — (2)  To  show 
that  Christian  fruitfulness  honors  God  and  consequently  must  be 
most  grateful  and  pleasing  to  him.  Such  fruit-bearing  is  alto- 
gether in  harmony  with  his  own  nature— always  "doing  good  to 
all" — "his  tender  mercies  evermore  over  all  his  works."  In  one 
important  view  this  is  what  men  are  converted  for,  viz.  that  they 
may  be  laborers  together  witli  God  to  put  forward  God's  own 
work  of  salvation  in  a  world  of  lost  men. 

"  So  shall  ye  be  my  disciples" — for  this  and  only  this  is  learn- 
ing truly  of  me ;  imbibing  my  spirit ;  walking  in  my  footsteps. 
For  this  I  have  called,  taught,  trained  you  all ;  this  work,  there- 
fore, I  expect  at  your  hands. 

9.  As  the  Father  hath  loved  me,  so  have  I  loved  you: 
continue  ye  in  my  love 

They  could  not  doubt  that  the  Father  loved  his  Son  Jesus; 
there  might  be  ground  for  doubt  or  fear  whether  Jesus  could  love 
them.  This  statement  was  therefore  well  adapted  to  confirm  their 
conviction  and  sense  of  the  love  of  their  Master.  The  exhoi'- 
tation — "  Continue  ye  in  my  love,"  assumed  that  they  might  for- 
feit and  alienate  his  love.  Let  them  take  care  to  avoid  every  thing 
that  could  tend  to  this  result;  let  them  also  cultivate  and  cherish 
whatever  would  serve  not  only  to  perpetuate  but  to  intensify  his 
love  for  them. 

We  must  not  omit  to  notice  how  very  timely  these  words  were, 
considering  hoAV  soon  these  disciples  were  to  be  left  alone,  under 
circumstances  in  which  the  sense  of  Jesus'  love  would  seem  to  be 
their  only  remaining  consolation,  and  their  only  source  of  cour- 
age to  heart  or  hope. 

10.  If  ye  keep  my  commandments,  ye  shall  abide  m  my 
love ;  even  as  I  have  kept  my  Father's  commandments,  and 
abide  in  his  love. 

It  was  kind  as  well  as  considerate  in  Jesus  to  tell  them  how 
they  might  retain  his  love,  "  abide  "  in  it,  according  to  the  fig- 
ure of  branches  abiding  in  their  vine.  They  must  "  keep  his 
commandments."  This  keeping  Avould  be  the  proof  of  their  love 
(as  he  had  often  said) ;  and  it  Avould  ensure  his  continued  love 
to  them.  To  enforce  this,  he  appeals  to  his  OAvn  case  as  toward 
his  Father.  Their  relation  to  him  was  the  same  as  his  to  his 
Father. 

11.  These  things  have  I  spoken  unto  you,  that  my  joy 
might  remain  in  you,  and  tJiat  your  joy  might  be  full. 

In  these  exhortations  Jesus  had  two  objects,  viz,  his  own  con- 
tinued joy  in  them,  and  their  augmented,  completed  joy  in  him. 
In  the  opposite  course,  they  would  bring  bitter  grief  to  him ; 
and  not  woe  onlj"-,  but  ruin  upon  themselves.  Would  they  not 
think  of  this  contrast  and  strive  to  appreciate  its  moral  force? 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XV.  233 

12.  This  is  my  commandiuent,  That  ye  love  one  another, 
as  I  have  loved  you. 

13.  Greater  love  hath  no  man  than  this,  that  a  man  lay 
down  liis  life  for  his  friends. 

14.  Ye  are  my  friends,  if  ye  do  whatsoever  I  command 
you. 

This  command — "  Love  one  another  " — is  repeated  here  (see 
13:  34),  even  with  the  same  words  annexed — "As  I  have  loved 
j-ou  " — which  we  may  take  as  at  once  the  standard  or  measure, 
and  also  the  motive,  of  this  new  command.  We  may  suppose  it 
repeated  here  for  the  twofold  reason — that  it  lay  so  near  his 
heart;  and  that  he  wished  to  enlarge  upon  the  appended  clause 
considered  as  a  motive.  "As  I  have  loved  you  ;  '  but  consider 
how  great  this  love  of  mine  toward  j-ou  has  been,  and  how  you 
Avill  properly  look  upon  it  when  you  see  me  die  for  you.  No 
manifestation  of  love  can  Be  stronger  than  to  lay  down  one's 
life  for  his  friend.  What  more,  what  beyond  this  can  man  pos- 
sibly do  ?  lie  has  no  costlier  gift  to  bestow — no  greater  sacri- 
fice to  make.  But  precisely  this  is  what  Jesus  docs  for  his 
friends.  Now  he  asks  them  to  show  themselves  his  friends  by 
doing  what  he  commands.  Does  he  not  imply — 1  ask  of  you 
nothing  more  ?  So  much— for  my  life  laid  down  for  you — I 
liave  the  right  to  ask;  so  much  you  will  surely  do  for  your  d}-- 
ing  Friend ! 

15.  Henceforth  I  call  you  not  servants ;  for  the  servant 
knoweth  not  what  his  lord  doeth  :  but  I  have  called  you 
friends ;  for  all  things  that  I  have  heard  of  my  Father  I 
have  made  known  unto  you. 

The  word  confidential  gives  the  pith  of  this  verse.  Jesus 
treated  his  disciples  as  his  confidential  friends.  They  were  not 
"  henceforth" — for  the  statement  looks  somewhat  more  to  the  fu- 
ture than  to  the  past — to  be  mere  servants  for  toil  and  drudgery 
— to  do  service  not  knowing  why  this  rather  than  any  thing  else; 
but  as  fi-iends,  taken  by  the  Master  into  the  fellowship  and  confi- 
dence of  co-workers,  intelligent  helpers,  who  should  understand 
the  nature  and  object  of  their  work,  and  feel  consequently  a  per- 
sonal interest  in  its  results. We  can  not  withhold  the  remark 

that  he  who  spake  these  words  understood  human  nature — knew 
full  well  how  powerfully  such  expressions  of  confidence  impress 
responsibility,  draw  out  the  heart,  inspire  endeavor. 

If  it  be  said  that  this  verse  runs  in  a  very  different  strain  from 
13:  13,  16,  "Ye  call  me  Master  and  Lord,  and  ye  say  well,  for  so 
I  am,"  etc.,  the  reply  is — even  so;  the  strain  is  dififerent;  the 
object  is  different  and  each  good  and  noble  in  its  place.  Yet 
there  is  no  conflict  whatever  between  the  two.  The  earlier  state- 
ment contemplated  his  real  superiority,  his  higher  dignity;  but 
was  utterly  far  from  thrusting    the- disciples    into   the    position 


234  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XV. 

of  servility.  This  latter  by  no  means  denies  Christ's  infinite 
superiority ;  j^et  it  does  imply  great  condescension — a  sjmipathy 
and  fellowship  -vYhich  rest — may  we  not  say  ? — upon  a  common 
humanity,  and  upon  the  confidence  Avhich  real  love  begets  where 

it  safely  may. "All  things  which  I  have  heard  of  my  Father," 

pertaining  to  the  scheme  of  salvation — to  the  methods,  encourage- 
ments, inspirations  for  Christian  work;  all  the  things  needful  for 
your  guidance  and  efficiency — 1  have  made  known  unto  you.  As 
ye  contemplate  this  great  wealth  of  truth,  pause  and  think  of  it 
as  the  outflowing  of  my  confiding  heart  toward  you  as  laborers 
together  with  God ;  regard  it  as  said  to  you  because  ye  are  my 
friends,  as  to  whom  I  have  no  concealments — nothing  other  than 
fraternal  confidence. 

16.  Ye  have  not  cliosen  me,  but  I  have  cho.?en  you,  and 
ordained  you,  that  ye  should  go  and  bring  forth  fruit,  and 
that  your  fruit  should  remain  ;  that  whatsoever  ye  shall  ask 
of  the  Father  in  my  name,  he  may  give  it  you. 

The  choice  which  brought  these  men  rather  than  others  into 
the  family  of  Jesus  and  into  the  first  group  of  apostles  was  made 
by  Jesus,  not  by  them — was  his  choosing  of  them,  not  their  choos- 
ing of  him.  He  set  them  apart  by  ordination  to  their  work,  with 
these  two  great  objects — both  of  a  sort  to  be  brought  out  perti- 
nently here,  viz,  that  they  should  bring  forth  much  and  abidfng 
fruit:  and  that  they  might  be  models  of  prevailing  prayer — evin- 
cing its  principles,  its  methods,  and  glorious  possibilities.  Let 
them  take  coui-age  even  to  the  point  of  full  assurance  of  success 

in  their  work. What   could    be   more   inspiring  ?     Called  of 

Jesus  into  his  service  with  such  a  calling,  for  such  ends,  with 
such  sustaining  forces — how  "  strong  in  the  Lord  "  it  was  their 
privilege  to  become! 

Need  we  say  less  of  all  their  successors  in  every  ago,  and  not 
least,  our  own  ? 

17.  These  things  I  command  you,  that  ye  love  one 
another. 

I  have  enjoined  upon  you  several  precepts  ;  let  them  all  bear 
upon  this  one  great,  freshly  announced  duty — that  of  love  to  one 
another.  My  heart  feels  this  most  deeply  :  how  can  I  forbear  to 
repeat  it  and  to  make  every  thing  converge  to  enforce  it? 

18.  If  the  world  hate  you,  ye  know  that  it  hated  me  be- 
fore it  hated  you. 

19.  If  ye  were  of  the  world,  the  world  would  love  his 
own ;  but  because  ye  are  not  of  the  world,  but  I  have  chosen 
you  out  of  the  w^orld,  therefore  the  Avorld  hateth  you. 

20.  Remember  the  word  that  I  said  unto  you,  The  ser- 
vant is  not  greater  than  his  lord.     If  they  have  persecuted 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XV.  235 

me,  tliey  uill  also  persecute  you ;  if  tlioy  have  kept  my  say- 
ing, they  "will  keep  yours  also. 

21.  But  all  these  things  will  they  do  unto  you  for  my 
name's  sake,  because  they  know  not  him  that  sent  me. 

"If"  (v.  IS)  supposes  no  doubtful  contingency.  The  Avorld 
will  hate  you.  When  you  feel  its  hatred  malign  and  scornful, 
then  consider  for  your  comfort  that  your  Master  bore  the  same 
befoi'e  it  fell  on  you.  Let  there  come,  with  the  world's  scorn, 
this  consolation,  that  it  proves  you  not  of  them — not  of  their 
party,  but  of  mine.  Ye  can  afford  to  bear  their  hatred  for  the 
sake  of  my  love.  Moreover,  remember  what  I  said  to  you  about 
servant  and  Lord.  If  they  abuse  the  Lord,  ye  should  expect 
them  to  abuse  the  servant  no  less.  Consider ;  they  have  perse- 
cuted me  ;  they  will  you.  If  they  had  kept  -my  saying,  ye  might 
hope  they  would  keep  yours  ;  but  since  tliey  have  rejected  mine, 

ye  must  expect  nothing  better. "  Do  unto  you  for  my  name's 

sake,"  means  because  ye  bear  my  name.  Because  they  hate  me, 
they  will  also  hate  mine. They  hate  me  and  mine  also  be- 
cause they  refuse  to  know  that  my  Father  hath  sent  me.  They 
have  set  at  nought  the  testimony  I  have  given  them  of  my  mis- 
sion from  the  Father.  In  this  ignorance  and  blindness  which 
themselves  have  chosen,  they  must  remain  my  enemies  and  die 
in  their  sins. 

22.  If  I  had  not  come  and  spoken  unto  them,  they  had 
not  had  sin ;  but  now  they  liave  no  cloak  for  their  sin. 

23.  He  that  hateth  me  hateth  my  Father  also. 

24.  If  I  had  not  done  among  them  the  works  Avhich  none 
other  man  did,  they  had  not  had  sin:  but  now  have  they 
both  seen  and  hated  both  me  and  my  Father. 

25.  But  this  Cometh  to  pass,  that  the  word  might  be  ful- 
filled that  is  Avritten  in  their  law,  They  hated  me  without  a 
cause. 

The  underlying  doctrine  here  is  that  light  sinned  against  both 
heightens  and  measures  the  guilt  of  sin.  So  far  indeed  does  Je- 
sus carry  this  point  that  he  speaks  as  if  those  Jews  would  have 
been  without  sin — sinless — if  he  had  not  come  among  them  and 
spoken  to  them,  doing  before  their  eyes  miraculous  works  never 
done  by  mortals.  But  we  must  construe  these  w^ords  as  referring 
to  the  sin  of  rejecting  his  mission,  and  not  to  every  other  form 
of  sin.  Tiiat  sin  of  unbelief  toward  himself  was  specially  in  his 
mind :  it  is  therefore  legitimate  to  interpret  his  words  as  refer- 
ring to  that  sin  only.  So  construed,  they  would  doubtless  have 
been  without  sin  if  they  had  had  no  light  at  all  as  to  his  claims 

to  be  the  Son  of  God  and  their  promised  Messiah. This  hatred 

of  Jesus  involved  also  hatred  of  his  Father.  Through  the  preach- 
ing of  Jesus  they  had  come  to  know  more  of  God  the  Father, 


236  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.    XVI. 

and  hence  their  hatred  of  him  became  more  intelligent  and  more 
damning. 

In  these  facts  those  ancient  scriptures  (Ps.  35:  19,  and  69:  4) 
had  their  significance  filled  out.  Holy  men  of  old  had  this  plaint 
to  make;  ■why  should  not  Jesus  also?  and  his  faithful  followers 
no  less? 

26.  But  Avlien  the  Comforter  is  come,  whom  I  will  send 
unto  you  from  the  Father,  even  the  Spirit  of  truth,  which 
proceedeth  from  the  Father,  he  shall  testify  of  me  : 

27.  And  ye  also  shall  bear  witness,  because  ye  have  been 
with  me  from  the  beginning. 

Jesus  repeats  here  many  things  said  before  (14:  16,  17,  26)  of 
the  Comforter,  and  obviously  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  out 
more  fully  his  witnessing  agency  for  Christ.  In  the  context  Je- 
sus had  spoken  of  himself  as  maligned,  hated,  rejected  by  the 
men  of  his  generation— the  "world"  of  those  times — before 
whom  he  had  testified  as  to  his'  mission  from  God.  When  they 
shall  have  put  him  to  death,  will  this  testimony  of  his  be  quashed 
— its  force  be  exhausted,  and  its  light  extinguished  forever  ?  No, 
indeed.  The  glorious  Spirit  of  truth,  proceeding  from  the  Fa- 
ther, will  take  up  the  theme  and  testify  for  Jesus  through  tongues 

of  flame,  and  with  transcendent,  convincing  power. Ye  too 

shall  bear  witness  for  me  because  ye  have  been  with  me  from 
the  first,  personally  familiar  Avith  my  teachings,  my  miracles,  my 

life. The  hour  would  come — was  not  far  hence  even  then — 

when  such  words  from  Jesus  would  be  supremely  inspiring. 
How  they  must  have  come  up  to  their  minds  afresh  amid  the 
glories  of  the  Great  Pentecost !  How  the  witnessing  testimonies 
of  that  scene  must  have  quenched  the  fear  of  the  disciples  lest 
their  Master's  claims  and  cause  were  doomed  to  go  down  in  dis- 
honor and  oblivion ! 


CHAPTER    XVI. 

Tliis  chapter  closes  the  convei'sations  of  Jesus  held  with  his 
disciples  prior  to  the  scenes  of  Gethsemane.  The  central  thought 
is — the  approaching  separation — Jesus  soon  to  leave  them  and  re- 
turn to  the  Father.  In  view  of  this  near  event,  he  apprises  them 
of  the  persecutions  they  must  meet  (vs.  1-4) ;  assures  them  there 
is  occasion  rather  for  joy  than  for  sorrow  in  his  departure,  for 
his  going  is  to  be  followed  by  the  Spirit's  coming  (vs.  5-7); 
shown  in  what  the  Spirit  will  do;  {a.)  as  toward  the  ungodly  (vs. 
8-11) ; — (6.)  for  themselves,  especially  in  revealing  Jesus  to  their 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVI.  237 

sou]s  (vs.  12-15).  The  transient  pain  but  ensuing  joy  consequent 
upon  his  leaving  them,  and  their  subsequent  coming  to  him,  are 
put  (in  vs.  16-22).  Tlie  subject  of  prayer  recurs  again  (vs.  23- 
27),  and  also  the  leading  theme — his  return  to  the  Father  and  its 
resuks  to  themselves,  Avith  closing  words  of  consolation  (vs.  28- 

Ob). 

1.  The.se  tilings  have  I  spoken  unto  you,  that  ye  should 
not  be  ofiended. 

2.  They  shall  put  you  out  of  the  synagogues :  yea,  the 
time  Cometh,  that  Avhosoever  killeth  you  Avill  think  that  lie 
doeth  (xod  service. 

3.  And  these  things  Avill  tliey  do  unto  you,  because  they 
liave  not  known  the  Father,  nor  me. 

The  merely  English  reader  may  need  the  caution  not  to  take 
the  word  "  offended  "  in  the  sense  of  being  displeased.  It  means 
only  being  stumbled — l.  e.  perplexed,  puzzled,  and  perhaps  con- 
seqently  discouraged.  Jesus  forcAvarns  them  of  impending  per- 
secution, to  the  end  that  it  should  not  take  them  by  surprise,  but 
should  rather  confirm  their  faith  in  himself.  The  religious  au- 
thorities of  the  Jews  would  excommunicate  them  from  their 
church  [synagogue],  and  with  a  perverted  and  terribly  bigoted 
conscience,  would  shed  their  life-blood,  and  think  it  a  religious  of- 
fering acceptable  to  God.  All  this  because  they  had  not  known 
(iod  the  Father  nor  his  Son.  They  assumed  that  they  knew 
God ;  no  mistake  could  be  greater.  They  would  not  know  him  ; 
they  Avere  in  no.mood  of  mind  to  receive  the  real  truth  respectiug 
either  the  Father  or  the  Son. 

4.  But  these  things  have  I  tohl  you,  that  Avhen  the  time 
shall  come,  ye  may  remember  that  I  told  you  of  them. 
And  these  things  I  said  not  unto  you  at  the  beginning,  be- 
cause I  Avas  Avith  you. 

5.  But  noAV  I  go  my  Avay  to  him  that  sent  me ;  and  none 
of  you  asketh  me,  Whither  goest  thou  ? 

6.  But  because  I  have  said  tliese  things  luito  you,  sorroAV 
hath  filled  your  heart. 

Those  forwarnlngs  of  persecution  might  pass  from  their  minds 
for  a  season,  but  AV'ould  be  recalled  Avhen  the  bloody  scenes  should 
open,  and  might  then  serve  to  confirm  their  faith  in  Jesus  as 
both  foreknowing  all,  and  in  his  compassion  and  Avisdom,  labor- 
ing to  prepare  them  to   meet  even  the  worst  Avith  courage   and 

joy. On  V.  5 — "  None  of  you  asketh  me,"  etc.,  the  reader  will 

naturally  say — Did  not  Peter  (13  :  36)  ask  this  very  question, 
"Whither  goest  thou?"  and  did  not  Thomas  (14:  5)  remark, 
"Lord,  Ave  know  not  Avhither  thou  goest?" — The  explanation 
probably  is  that  the  question  Whither  had  excited  much  less  at- 
11 


238  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVI. 

tention  than  he  had  a  right  to  expect.  The  disciples  were  en- 
grossed with  other  things — brooding  sadly  over  their  own  pros- 
pective bereavement,  rather  than  turning  with  inquiring  thought 
toward  the  future  of  their  Lord.  Was  there  not  a  shade  of  sel- 
fishness in  this  ? 

7.  Nevertheless  I  tell  you  the  truth ;  It  is  expedient  for 
you  that  I  go  away;  for  if  I  go  not  away,  the  Comforter 
Avill  not  come  uiito  you;  but  if  I  depart,  I  -will  send  him 
unto  you. 

It  was  in  part  to  meet  this  extreme  solicitude  as  to  their  own 
case  when  Jesus  should  have  gone  that  he  here  declares  emphati- 
cally that  even  for  them  (no  less  than  for  himself)  it  was  well 

that  he  should  go. "Expedient" — in  the  sense  of  profitable, 

conducive  to  ends  that  were  of  the  very  highest  value  to  his 
kingdom.  It  would  be  expedient  because  the  coming  of  the 
Comforter  hinged  upon  his  own  going.  If  I  go  not,  he  does  not 
come.  When  I  go,  1  shall  send  him  to  fill  and  more  than  till  my 
place. 

The  truth  here  taught  most  explicitly  is  too  vital  to  be  passed 
without  attention.  Comparing  the  spiritual  work  respectively  of 
himself  here  in  the  flesh  with  that  of  the  Comforter,  he  represents 
the  latter  as  being  most  effective,  most  fruitful,  and  therefore 
most  to  be  desired  by  his  people.  To  show  how  and  why  this  is 
the  case,  he  adduces — (1)  Ilis  agency  upon  unbelievers — men  in 
their  sins ;  and  (2)  His  functions  as  to  believers — guiding  them 
into  all  truth  ;  imparting  such  truth  as  God  might  send  through 
him;  revealing  things  to  come;  but  especially,  setting  forth  in 
new  light  all  tliey  needed  to  know  of  Christ — "  receiving  of  mine 
and  showing  it  unto  you."' (3)  By  no  means  least  in  impor- 
tance is  the  fact  that  the  agency  of  the  Spirit  has  no  limitations 
of  place  or  time.  The  presence  of  Jesus  in  the  flesh  was  of  ne- 
cessity restricted  to  few — sometimes  to  the  most  favoi'ed  three ; 
usually  to  the  chosen  twelve  ;  "more  rarely  to  a  somewhat  enlarged 
circle  of  friends,  or  to  a  listening  group  of  hearers,  yet  always 
under  the  limitations  of  one  human  voice,  and  of  the  physical 
endurance  of  one  living  man.  But  the  Spirit  is  simply  Omni- 
present, and  of  never  waning,  never  wearied  energy — bounded 
by  no  limitations  of  space  or  time  or  power.  In  every  land,  at 
every  hour,  among  the  countless  peoples  of  the  wide  earth  simul- 
taneously, his  work  may  go  forward,  only  the  more  efiectively  as 
the  numbers  brought  under  his  influence  shall  be  multiplied. 
What  an  accession  of  power — what  an  augmentation  of  forces — 
is  to  come  from  this  substitution  of  the  presence  of  the  Divine 

Spirit  for  the  personal  presence  of  Jesus  in  the  flesh ! Those 

who  express  such  impassioned  longing  for  Jesus  to  come  again  to 
earth  in  his  visible  person,  to  reverse  the  whole  scheme  of 
spiritual  agencies,  and  to  set  us  back  to  the  state  of  things  in  Ju- 
dea  and  Galilee,  would  do  well   to  consider  the   si2;nificance  of 


GOSPEL  OF  JOIIX.— CHAP.  XVI.  239 

these  declarations.  If  believers  were  to  have  the  presence  of 
Josus  only  through  their  bodily  eye,  how  would  the  uncounted 
millions  in  all  the  continents  of  the  earth  deplore  their  loss! 
Of  how  little  avail  would  be  all  the  pilgrimages  possible  to  hu- 
man flesh  to  get  a  moment's  vision  of  his  bodily  form,  and  to 
hear  one  word,  if  they  might,  from  his  living  voice  I  la  what 
terms,  then,  shall  we  express  the  folly  of  longing  and  praying  that 
Jesus  would  come  again  to  earth  to  show  his,  people  his  human 
body  under  the  same  laws  of  limitation  as  when  he  taught  in  the 
temple  or  sat  around  the  passover  board  in  the  holy  city !  As  if 
it  were  expedient  now — not  for  him  to  be  in  heaven  and  the 
Spirit  on  the  earth — but,  reversing  this  present  order,  and  falling 
back  upon  the  former  system — to  let  the  Spirit  return  to  the 
heavenly  spheres,  and  .Tesus  come  to  manifest  his  human  body 
before  human  eyes  as  of  old! 

The  theory  underl3dng  these  notions  as  to  Christ's  visible  com- 
ing seems  to  be  that  the  plan  of  the  gospel  dispensation  as  set  forth 
by  Jesus  in  these  chapters  might  be  very  much  improved  by  re- 
turning to  the  methods  in  force  during  his  public  ministry,  be- 
fore his  ascension,  and  before  the  Great  Pentecost; — in  other 
Avords — that  it  was  a  mistake  to  suppose  it  "  expedient  for  you 
(Christians)  that  1  should  go  away  and  the  Comforter  come." 

If  any  should  reply  to  this  that  the  limitations  of  human  flesh 
are  to  be  ruled  out  by  the  resurrection  body  and  by  new  modes 
of  spiritual  existence — i.  e.  by  bringing  down  to  earth  not  Jesus 
only  but  heaven  itself;  then  I  answer — This  theory  or  scheme, 
instead  of  improving  gospel  work,  rules  it  out  entirely ;  instead 
of  introducing  mightier  spiritual  forces  to  sustain  the  Christian 
life  and  to  convert  sinners  to  God — puts  an  end  to  probation; 
shuts  down  on  the  age  of  mercy  for  lost  men ;  abandons  the  con- 
version of  the  world  to  Christ,  and  puts  the  Christian  heart  in 
the  attitude  of  saying — 0  for  an  end  of  this  working  for  Christ 
toward  human  salvation !     O  for  the  heavenly  rest,  in  place  of  this 

weariness  of  toil ! To  all  which  the  fit  reply  is — By  what  right 

are  we  praying  God  to  desist  from  his  scheme  of  converting  the 
world  to  Christ?  With  what  reason  are  we  putting  our  opinion 
against  the  expressed  opinion  of  Jesus  as  to  the  expediency  of 
his  going  away  that  the  Spirit  may  come?  With  what  face  do 
we  ask  to  be  excused  from  labor  and  to  have  our  pay  before  our 
day's  work  is  done? 

As  bearing  with  great  weight  upon  the  expediency  of  Christ's 
going  away  that  the  Spirit  might  come,  let  the  reader  consider 
carefully  that  as  the  case  is  put  here,  his  going  is  made  the  defi- 
nite condition  of  the  Spirit's  coming.  If  Christ  does  not  go,  the 
Spirit  does  not  come.  Now  does  not  this  imply  that  if  Christ 
returns  to  earth  again,  the  Spirit  also  returns  to  his  own  heaven? 
Why  not?  Especially  must  this  question — Why  not')  carry  great 
force  if  we  take  into  account  that  Jesus  makes  the  sending  of  the 
Spirit  hinge  upon  his  own  prayer  before  the  Father's  throne: 
"If  I  go  1  will  send  him  unto  you;"  "I  will  pray  the  Father  and 


240  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  XVI. 

he  shall  send,"  etc.  For  reasons  that  lie  in  the  economy  of  the 
heavenly  world,  Jesus  must  appear  there  in  person  before  the 
Father,  interceding  for  the  Spirit  as  the  condition  of  his  being 
sent.  It  does  not  devolve  upon  us  to  set  forth  and  explain  the 
reasons  underlying  this  divine  arrangement;  yet  nothing  could 
be  more  presuming — perhaps  nothing  more  offensive  to  God — 
^  than  to  assume  that  he  has  no  good  reasons  for  requiring  Jesus 
to  be  there  in  order  that  the  Spirit  may  be  here ;  or  to  assume 
that  the  Father  would  readily  modify  this  arrangement  to  meet 
human  schemes. 

Perhaps  it  would  startle  some  admirers  of  the  pre-millennial 
advent  scheme  to  find  that  according  to  these  scriptures,  if  Jesus 
returns  to  be  here  in  the  flesh  as  he  was  in  Judea  of  old,  the 
Spirit  also  returns  to  his  former  place  and  his  special  agency 
among  men  is  superseded  by  the  visible  presence  of  Jesus,  reign- 
ing here,  not  praying  there.  It  ought  to  startle  us  if  we  find  that 
our  speculations  are  reversing  the  order  of  the  divine  plans. 

8.  And  when  he  is  come,  he  will  reprove  the  world  of  sin, 
and  of  righteousness,  and  of  judgment : 

9.  Of  sin,  because  they  believe  not  on  me ; 

10.  Of  righteousness,  because  I  go  to  my  Father,  and  ye 
see  me  no  more; 

11.  Of  judgment,  bocause  the  prince  of  this  world  is 
judged. 

To  prove  that  it  is  expedient  for  himself  to  go  and  the  Spirit  to 
come,  Jesus  proceeds  to  state  what  the  Spirit  will  do ; — first,  as  to 
the  ungodly — the  "world"  in  their  sins.  In  general  his  work  as 
to  sinners  is  to  rejyrove  them;  i.  e.  to  enforce  conviction  as  to  their 
sin ;  to  bring  the  truth  that  shall  convict  before  their  intelligence 
and  to  make  it  eifective  upon  the  conscience.  Then,  with  re- 
markalile  method  and  consequent  clearness,  he  makes  three  dis- 
tinct points  as  to  which  he  will  reproA'e  or  convict  them;  viz:  sin; 
righteousness ;  and  judgment.  Then  resuming  each  point  sepa- 
rately, to  show  more  particularly  what  the  Spirit  will  do,  he 
says  ; — "  Of  sin  because  they  believe  not  on  me."  The  sin  of  not 
believing  on  Jesus  is  the  capital  sin — the  one  great,  comprehen- 
sive, all-inclusive  sin  of  ungodly  men.  All  other  sins  could  be 
forgiven  and  their  power  on  the  heart  broken — if  the  sinner 
would  believe  on  Jesus.  No  sin  other  than  this  so  deeply  insults 
the  Lord  of  glory;  no  otlior  so  cruelly  wounds  his  heart;  none 
other  so  fatally  baffles  his  efforts  for  that  sinner's  salvation,  or 
so  surely  dooms  him  to  remediless  woe.  Appropriately,  there- 
fore, will  the  Spirit  concentrate  his  efibrts  to  set  before  every  sin- 
ner's eye  the  guilt  of  not  believing  on  Jesus. This   accords 

with  the  experience  of  all  truly  convicted  souls,  and  is  in  har- 
mony with  the  soundest  philosophy. 

The  Spirit  when  he  comes  will  plead  for  Christ;  will  testify  to 
the  sin  of  setting  him  at  nought  and  despising  his  salvation;  will 


GOSPEL  OF  JOIIX.— CILVr.  XVI.  241 

make  tins  cruel,  damning  sin  stand  forth  in  the  sunlight  of  infi- 
nite truth  before  the  sinner's  soul. From  which  -we  pause  here 

only  to  suggest  these  two  deductions: — (a.)  That  the  Christian 
laborer  whoAvould  bo  a  worker  together  with  God  in  saving  sin- 
ners should  press  this  point  above  any  and  all  others: — (b.)  That 
tiie  sinner  who  has  any  wish  to  be  converted  and  saved  should 
fix  his  eye  on  this  great  sin;  should  consent  to  see  its  enormity 
and  to  feel  its  guilt;  and  should  of  course  turn  from  it  by  coming 
to  Jesus  in  penitence,  in  love,  in  simple  trust  for  salvation. 

Next;  the  Spirit  "will  reprove  the  world  of  rii/Jiteousncss" — 
"  because  (said  Jesus)  1  go  to  the  Father  and  j'e  see  me  no  more." 
Of  lohose  "righteousness"?  Of  his  who  goes  to  the  Father. 
jMoi-eover,  the  nature  of  tiie  case  forbids  us  to  think  of  the  sin- 
ner's righteousness,  for  he  has  none;  or  of  the  word  as  applying 
to  any  other  than  Jesus. 

"Righteousness"  must  here  have  essentially  the  sense  of  right- 
ncss — the  truth  and  justness  of  his  claim  to  be  the  Son  of  God, 
sent  of  God  to  men  with  revelations  of  truth  and  messages  of 
mercy.  The  Spirit  will  vindicate  the  rightness  of  this  claim  of 
Jesus  by  appealing  to  his  resurrection  and  ascension  to  the  Fa- 
ther. This  is  every-wherc  the  doctrine  of  the  New  Testament; 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus  was  the  supreme  testimony  to  his  ]\Ies- 
siahship.  If  he  had  failed  to  rise  again,  there  would  have  been 
no  Savior;  all  the  preaching  of  the  apostles  would  have  been  in 
vain  (1  Cor.  15  :  13-15)  ;  all  faitli  in  him  vain;  all  men  would  be 

hopelessly  in  their  sins. In   harmony  with  this  construction 

of  these  words  was  the  whole  history  of  apostolic  practice  and 
preaching.  They  chose  their  twelfth  man  to  fill  the  j^lace  of  Ju- 
das that  he  might  (as  they  said)  "be  a  witness  with  us  of  his 
resurrection"  (Acts  1  :  21,  22).  They  began  with  preaching — 
"This  Jesus  hath  God  raised  up,  whereof  we  all  are  witnesses" 
(Acts  2:  32).  The  voice  of  that  history  is — "With  great  power 
gave  the  apostles  witness  of  his  resurrection  "  (Acts  4  :  33).  The 
text  and  theme  of  Paul's  preaching  at  Athens  was  "Jesus  and 

the  resurrection"  (Acts  17:  18). Thus  was  the  righteousness 

of  Jesus  set  forth  before  the  men  of  that  generation.  lie  was 
proved  to  have  been  sent  of  God  because  God  raised  him  from  the 
dead,  and  set  him  at  his  own  right  hand  in  the  heavenly  places 
far  above  all  principalities  and  powers  (I<lph.  1  :  20,  21). 

"  And  ye  see  me  no  more  " — no  more  till  the  Spirit's  work  of 
convicting  and  saving  sinners  is  finished ;  no  more  till  I  come 
again  to  close  this  scene  of  earthly  probation  and  inaugurate  the 
era  of  eternal  retribution. 

"  Of  judgment  because  the  prince  of  this  world  is  judged."  In 
the  usage  of  Jesus  "the  prince  of  this  world"  is  no  other  than 
Satan  (John  12:  31,  and  14:  30).  He  is  "judged"  Avhen  the 
band  of  the  Almighty  falls  heavily  upon  him,  blasts  his  schemes  ; 
confounds  his  wisdom ;  overwhelms  his  power ;  makes  his  utmost 
wrath  work  out  God's  praise.  Satan  plotted  the  murder  of  Je- 
sus ;  made  Judas  and  the  Jewish  Sanhedrim  his  tools;  and  com- 


242  GOSrEL  OF   JOHN.— CIIAr.  XVI. 

liassed  liis  crucifixion.  Then,  did  he  not  exult  over  his  fallen 
enemy  ? — Ah  !  but  when  that  death  of  Jesus  proved  the  salvation 
of  the  world  and  his  own  utter  fall ;'  when  his  supposed  victory 
brought  only  disaster  to  his  kingdom  and  ruin  to  his  cause  ;  when 
he  whose  eye  swept  the  realms  of  the  spiritual  world  reported — 
"I  beheld  Satan  fall  as  lightning  from  heaven" — then  how  sud- 
denly did  his  fiendish  exultation  give  place  to  chagrin  and  shame  ! 
In  this  sense  Satan  was  "judged."  This  defeat  was  a  visitation 
of  righteous  justice  from  the  Almighty — a  foretoken  of  his  final 
doom  ; — and,  what  is  not  less  in  point  here — a  beginning  and 
foreshadowing  of  the  righteous  judgment  of  God  upon  all  the 
armies  of  Satan,  all  his  followers,  servants  and  sympathizers,  of 
earth  or  hell.  Persistent  sinners  of  whatever  race  or  world  might 
mark  the  fall  of  their  captain  and  read  in  it  their  own  approach- 
ing doom. Of  this  great  fact,  the  Spirit  of  God  when  he  came 

would  con'vict  [convince]  the  world.  We  may  suppose  this  to 
have  been  one  of  the  elements  of  that  convicting  power  which  fell 
on  the  gathered  thousands  at  the  first  great  Pentecost.  They  not 
only  saw  their  sin  in  rejecting  and  murdering  Jesus,  and  the 
righteousness  of  Jesus  vindicated  by  his  resurrection  and  ascen- 
sion to  the  Father ;  but  they  saw  Satan  hurled  down  from  the 
high  place  of  his  power  at  the  very  point  where  he  thought  him- 
self the  conqueror.  The  doom  of  Judas  the  traitor  lay  in  their 
eye,  suggesting  terrible  premonitions  of  like  doom  for  all  the 
enemies  of  Jesus. 

12.  I  have  yet  many  things  to  say  unto  you,  but  ye  can 
not  bear  them  now. 

13.  Howbeit  when  he,  the  S^Mrit  of  truth,  is  come,  he  will 
guide  you  into  all  truth  :  for  he  shall  not  speak  of  himself; 
but  whatsoever  he  shall  hear,  tJiat  shall  he  speak :  and  he 
will  shew  you  things  to  come. 

14.  He  shall  glorify  me  :  for  he  shall  receive  of  mine,  and 
shall  shew  it  unto  you. 

15.  All  things  that  the  Father  hath  are  mine:  therefore 
said  I,  that  he  shall  take  of  mine,  and  shall  shew  it  unto 
you. 

Protracted  as  this  last  series  of  conversations  was,  many  things 
remained  unsaid.  Precisely  what  these  many  things  were  we  can 
knoAV  only  so  far  as  we  infer  them  from  the  future  revelations 
made  through  the  Spirit.  Whether  the  disciples  could  not  bear 
them  then  because  of  physical  weariness,  or  because  so  many  new 
things  had  been  crowded  upon  their  minds  during  this  eventful 
evening,  or  because  their  Jewish  misconceptions  of  the  Messiah 
were  still  too  stubborn  and  misleading — does  not  clearly  appear. 
It  was  an  eventful  moment.  A  thousand  things  crowded  upon  the 
mind  of  the  Master  as  he  looked  down  into  the  great  crisis  of  his 
own  agony,  over  into  the  fearful  trials  that  awaited  his  scattered 


GOSPEL   OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  XVI.  243 

sheep  when  thoii*  Shepherd  should  be  smitten,  and  beyond  into 
the  new  fields  of  Christian  life  and  Christian  work  to  open  wlien 
the  Comforter  should  have  come:  how  could  he  say  all  that  pressed 
upon  his  laboring;  mind  ? 

It  was  a  relief  that  the  Spirit  of  truth  was  so  soon  to  come 
and  be  their  Great  Teacher  in  things  divine.  We  note  that  here 
the  Spirit  is  not  called  (as  before)  "the  Comforter,"  but  "the 
Spirit  of  truth" — the  Teacher  divine — to  guide  them  into  all 
truth,  to  speak  Avhat  he  should  hear  as  his  message  from  the  Fa- 
ther and  of  the  Son,  including  also  "  things  to  come  " — such  fu- 
ture events  revealed  in  prophecy  as  the  exigencies  of  the  times 
might  require. Jesus  gives  special  prominence  to  one  moment- 
ous fact,  in  the  words — "  He  shall  gloriiy  me  ;  for  he  shall  re- 
ceive of  mine  and  shall  show  it  unto  you."  "Receive  of  mine," 
in  the  sense  of  receiving  Avhat  concerns  me — the  truth  that  re- 
veals my  person,  character  and  works  ;  the  messages  I  send  through 
him ;  all  that  pertains  to  me  which  my  people  may  need  to  know 
for  their  consolation,  quickening,  joy,  and  efficiency  in  my  work. 
The   Sj^irit  is  to  he  the   Great  liecealer  of  Jesus  to  his  j^eojyte. 

The  things  of  Jesus  are  the  staple  of  his  messages  to  men — the 

matter  which  he  is  pre-eminently  to  teach. But  let  it  l)e  noted — ■ 

this  must  not  exclude  whatever  truth  relates  to  the  Father.  "All 
things  that  the  Father  hath"  (said  Jesus)  "are  mine."  It  was 
in  view  of  this  fact  in  our  mutual  relations  to  each  other  that  I 
said — "He  shall  take  of  mine  and  shall  show  it  unto  you."  Ye 
will  understand  that  I  l)y  no  means  exclude  the  truth  ye  need  to 
know  respecting  the  Father.  All  that  ti'uth  is  in  a  sense  mine, 
for  while  I  have  been  among  you  I  have  ahvays  said  that  I  came 
to  reveal  the  Father  and  have  made  this  my  chief  concern.  The 
Spirit  of  truth  takes  up  the  same  work,  revealing  both  the  Fa- 
ther and  the  Son. 

In  four  several  and  successive  passages  from  the  lips  of  Jesus 
(viz.  14:  16,  17,  28  and  15:  26,  and  16:  7-15)  we  have  had  a 
very  full  and  an  incomparably  precious  exposition  of  the  icoric 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  upon  human  souls.  It  is  so  full  a«  to  in- 
clude his  action  upon  believers  and  also  upon  the  unbelieving 
world.  These  passages  above  any  others  in  the  Scriptures,  are 
to  be  studied  if  we  Avould  gain  the  full  light  of  revelation  on 
this  subject  and  would  eliminate  Avhatever  errors  may  be  cur- 
rent in  regard  to  it. 

In  the  light  of  these  passages  let  me  call  attention  to  two  mis- 
apprehensions as  to  the  work  of  the  Spirit  which  are  (as  I  sup- 
pose) more  or  less  prevalent  in  our  age,  viz  : 

1.  That  his  work  is  to  create  capabilities  for  right  moral  ac- 
tion— i.  e.  to  implant  the  necessary  faculties,  or  at  least  to  impart 
the  power  to  use  the  faculties  of  the  soul  which  are  requisite  for 
right  action. 

2.  That  his  work  is  to  produce  emotion,  feeling,  sensibility  ; 
and  that  he  acts  upon  the  emotional  nature  rather  than  pri- 
marily upon  the  intelligence  and  conscience. 


244  GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVI. 

To  place  these  views  uudcr  the  light  of  our  passages,  I  remark 
as  to  the  first — 

1.  It  is  one  thing  to  create  capacities  for  right  moral  action, 
and  quite  anotlicr  to  induce  men  to  use  capacities  ah-eady  in  ex- 
istence. Tlie  former  is  the  error  now  in  question;  tlie  latter, 
its  correlated  truth. 

The  attentive  reader  will  readily  notice  that  these  passages  say 
nothing  which  implies  that  the  Spirit  creates  new  moral  facul- 
ties, or  even  imparts  a  new  and  previously  unknown  power  to 
use  such  faculties  aright.  On  the  contrary  every  thing  said  here 
contemplates  an  entirely  different  agency  from  that  of  an  original 

creation  of  faculties. For  observe  : — The  Spirit   is  "  another 

Comforter"  as  compared  to  Jesus — a  second  Jesus — taking  up 
and  doing  for  his  people  the  same  work  which  Jesus  did  for 
them  during  his  earthly  life.  IJut  this  Avork  of  Jesus  was  not 
to  make  new  faculties,  but  was  to  teach  men  how  to  use  thou 
— to  instruct  as  to  duty  and  to  persuade  men  to  do  it.      Such 

therefore  was   to  be  the  work  of  the  Spirit. Note  also  that 

the  Comforter  is  definitely  described  as  "  the  Sptirit  of  truth  " 
— the  Spirit  who  uses  truth  to  produce  the  moral  effects  which 
he  labors  to  secure.  With  most  entire  definiteness  it  is  said — 
"  He  shall  teach  you  all  things  and  bring  all  things  to  your  re- 
membrance whatsoever  I  have  said  unto  you  " — all  which  is  ac- 
tion upon   mind   by  means  of  truth. Note  also  that  what  is 

said  of  his  agency  upon  "the  tvorld,"  i.  e.  the  unbelieving,  is  all 
put  in  one  word,  "reprove"  in  the  sense  of  convict,  enforce  con- 
viction as  to  sin,  righteousness,  and  judgment.  This  is  action 
upon  a  mind  supposed  to  be  already  in  possession  of  intelligence 
and  conscience — the  faculties  requisite  for  moral  action.  It  as- 
sumes the  existence  of  such  powers,  and  brings  the  truth  to  bear 

upon  minds  so  constituted,  to  produce  this  conviction  of  sin. 

Thus  these  passages  in  which  Jesus  unfolds  the  work  of  the 
Spirit  lend  their  entire  force  to  the  doctrine  that  the  Spirit  acts 
by  means  of  truth  upon  minds  already  endowed  with  the  re- 
quisite powers  for  right  moral  action,  and  against  the  notion  that 
his  work  consists  in  creating  such  powers,  or  in  imparting  the 
ability  to  use  them. 

If  to  break  the  force  of  these  considerations,  appeal  be  made  to 
other  scriptures  which  speak  of  being  "  born  of  the  Spirit,"  and 
of  being  "  created  anew  in  Christ  Jesus,"  let  regard  be  had  to  two 
points  of  reply: — (a)  Whether  these  be  not  figurative  rather  than 
literal  expressions:  i.e.  figures  taken  from  changes  Avrought  in  the 
natural,  material  world,  and  applied  by  figurative  license  to  anal- 
ogous moral  changes  in  the  free  moral  attitudes  and  activities  of 
the  mind  : — and  (6)  whether  in  our  endeavor  to  reach  the  precise 
nature  of  the  Spirit's  agency,  we  ought  not  to  depend  on  these 
words  of  Jesus  which  are  as  explicit,  definite,  and  exact  as  lan- 
guage can  ever  be,  rather  than  upon  expressions  which  are  so  ob- 
viously figurative. 

2.  A  second  misconception  assumes  that  the  Spirit  acts  directly 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAr.  XVI.  245 

upon  the  emotional  nature  and  that  his  object  is  to  produce  cnio- 
tiou  rather  than  conviction  and  a  moral  change  in  the  Avill.  On 
this  point  Ave  need  to  discriminate  between  direct  purpose  and 
incidental  result.  Instruction  in  truth  aims  directly  at  conviction 
of  duty  and  obedience  to  this  conviction.  Yet  indirectly,  inci- 
dentally, such  conviction  Avill  naturally  result  in  more  or  less  emo- 
tion. I>ut  to  make  emotion  the  aim  and  purpose  is  a  totally  dif- 
ferent thing.  Home  preaching  is  purposely  sensational,  exciting, 
shaped  to  intensify  the  emotions.  Another  style  of  preaching 
aims  to  impart  and  impress  truth  and  so  to  convict  men  of  sin  and 
bring  them  to  duty.  As  shown  in  these  passages,  the  agency  of 
the  Spirit  moves  altogether  in  the  latter  line — instruction,  moral 
conviction,  obedience  to  the  truth.  To  supj^osc  therefore  that  the 
Spirit  aims  to  produce   emotion   is   by  no   means  Avarranted   by 

these   representations   of  his  work. It  will   follow  from   this 

view  of  his  work  that  we  are  not  to  judge  of  its  depth  and 
amount  by  the  emotional  excitement  whicli  may  appear,  but  from 
the  dcej:)  moral  conviction  and  the  radical  change  as  to  obedience 
to  God  which  may  result. 

Finall}^  these  views  of  the  work  of  the  Spirit  are  in  the  best 
sense  practical,  particularly  because  they  show  how  we  may  pro- 
mote and  facilitate  his  work;  and  also  how,  through  misapprehen- 
sion of  what  his  work  is,  we  may  retard  it — not  to  say,  frustrate 
it  altogether. 

Obviously  it  is  expected  of  us  that  we  profoundly  honor  the 
work  of  the  Spirit;  invite  and  welcome  his  presence  ;  of  set  pur- 
pose, do  the  utmost  in  our  power  to  promote   the  Avork  he  would 

do  and  the  results  he  would  secure. For  this  purpose  it  is  vital 

that  we  close  our  mind  against  diverting  thought,  and  open  it 
most  fully  to  the  truth  of  God.  We  are  made  capable  of  self- 
control  in  this  matter,  and  can,  if  so  we  Avill,  give  our  attention 
seriously  to  those  subjects  which  we  know  the  Spirit  would  fain 
teach  and  impress.  Serious  meditation  on  such  themes  naturally 
promotes  the  work  Avhich  the  Spirit  seeks  to  do  in  our  souls.  As 
in  the  case  of  the  disciples  the  Spirit  AA'ould  recall  the  Avords  of 
Jesus  to  their  remembrance,  so  aac  may  read  those  same  Avords 
and  invite  the  Spirit  to  teach  us  their  deep  significance  and  make 

them  Avords  of  poAver  and  life  to  our  hearts. In  this  lino  of 

purposed  labor  and  moral  effort,  Ave  may  become  "  workers  to- 
gether with  God  "  for  our  OAvn  spiritual  profit  and  for  the  profit 
also  of  others. 

16.  A  little  AA^hile,  and  yc  eliall  not  see  me:  and  again,  a 
little  while,  and  ye  shall  .see  me,  because  I  go  to  the  Fathei*. 

17.  Then  said  some  of  his  disciples  among  themselves, 
What  is  this  that  he  saith  unto  us,  A  little  Avhile,  and  ye 
shall  not  see  me  :  and  again,  a  little  Avhile,  and  ye  shall  see 
me:  and,  Because  I  go  to  the  Father? 


246  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVI. 

18.  They  said  therefore,  ^Yhat  is  this  that  he  saith,  A  lit- 
tle while?  we  can  not  tell  what  he  saith. 

19.  Now  Jesus  knew  that  they  wei-e  desirous  to  ask  him, 
and  said  unto  them.  Do  ye  inquire  among  yourselves  of  that 
I  said,  A  little  while,  and  ye  shall  not  see  me :  and  again, 
a  little  while,  and  ye  shall  see  me? 

20.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you.  That  ye  shall  weep  and 
lament,  but  the  world  shall  rejoice ;  and  ye  shall  be  sorrow- 
ful, but  your  sorrow^  shall  be  turned  into  joy. 

21.  A  woman  when  she  is  in  travail  hath  sorrow,  because 
her  hour  is  come :  but  as  soon  as  she  is  delivered  of  the 
child,  she  remembereth  no  more  the  anguish,  for  joy  that  a 
man  is  born  into  the  world. 

22.  And  ye  now  therefore  have  sorrow :  but  I  Avill  see  you 
again,  and  your  heart  shall  rejoice,  and  your  joy  no  man 
taketh  from  you. 

The  great  fact  that  he  must  leave  his  beloved  disciples  so  soon 
can  not  be  out  of  mind  long. — "A  little  while  " — here  only  a  few 
hours — and  he  must  go  from  their  presence  by  death.  Again,  it 
would  be  but  another  "little  while" — three  days  only — and  they 
would  see  him  again,  risen  from  the  dead.  A\'e  must  interpret 
the  second  "little  while"  on  the  same  scale  of  measurement  as 
the  first.  So  doing,  we  must  refer  it  to  his  resurrection,  and  not 
to  any  event  more  remote;  e.  g. — not   to   any   supposed   second 

coming;  not  to  his  meeting  them  after  their  individual  death. 

The  reason  why,  after  a  little,  they  should  not  see  him,  Avas — 
"Because  I  go  to  the  Father."  They  must  have  learned  ere  this 
that  these  words  from  his  lips  meant  his  own  death.  For  in  the 
very  opening  of  these  discourses  on  this  evening,  Jesus  had  said 
(John  14:  2):  "In  my  Father's  house  arc  many  mansions;"  "I  go 
to  prepare  a  place  for  you."  This  certainly  was  going  to  his 
Father's  house  and  home  by  means  of  dying. — But  the  words  now 
spoken  embraced  somewhat  more,  viz:  a  second  "little  while," 
after  which  they  would  see  him.  This  was  a  new  fact;  what 
could  it  mean?  They  talked  about  it  among  themselves  (in  an 
under-tone  perhaps),  possibly  ashamed  of  their  dullness  of  appre- 
hension, or  fearing  lest  their  inquisitiveness  might  be  out  of  har- 
mony with  the  deep  solemnity  of  these  moments.  But  Jesus 
either  heard  their  whispers  or  knew  their  hearts  otherwise  than 
through  their  words,  and  therefore  proceeds  to  meet  the  point  of 
chief  importance  by  an  illustration ; — that  of  a  woman  in  child- 
birth whose  transient  pangs  are  followed  with  the  luxury  of 
joy  over  "  a  man  born  into  the  world."  So  they  would  have  a 
few  most  desolate  days,  bereaved,  bewildered,  trembling  with  fear 
for  their  own  lives,  borne  down  with  sadness  in  the  loss  of  such 
a  Friend,  shocked  with  the  sudden  sinking  of  such  hopes  as 
they  had  still  cherished  in  the  promised  King  of  Israel,  coming 


GOSPEL  OF  JOIIX.— CHAP.  XVI.  247 

in  the  name  of  the  Lord  to  set  up  something  they  thought  of  as 
a  "kingdom."  It  is  hard  for  us  to  take  in  all  the  elements  of 
that  fierce  conflict  of  thoughts  and  emotions,  which  raged  in  their 
smitten  bosoms  Avhen  they  really  saw  their  blaster  hung  upon  the 

cross  till  he  was  certainly  dead ! This  rush  of  the  waves  of 

sorrow  Jesus  foresaw,  and  therefore  kindly  gave  them  these  words 
among  the  very  last — good  to  be  recalled  to  mind  in  the  bitterness 
of  that  anguish.  lie  did  not  care  to  go  into  a  very  minute  ex- 
planation of  the  shortness  of  these  two  periods — the  first  .and  the 
second  "little  while" — but  he  did  say — -"I  will  see  you  again, 
and  your  heart  shall  rejoice."  The  historian  verifies  the  fulfill- 
ment of  this  prediction,  remarking  upon  their  feelings  when  Jesus 
showed  tliem  his  hands  and  his  feet  with  the  nail-prints  still 
fresh; — "Then  were  the  disciples  glad  when  they  saw  the  Lord" 

(20:    20). It  was   no  insignificant  thing  to  add — "And  your 

joy  no  man  taketh  from  you."  For,  the  ground  of  this  joy 
could  never  pass  away.  Jesus  lived  again — to  die  no  more.  He 
had  said  (and  they  would  know  the  truth  of  it  more  and  moi"e 
forever) — "Because  I  live,  ye  shall  live  also."  Their  joy  in 
such  a  Savior  no  man  could  take  away.  Fire  and  f\igot  could  not 
burn  it;  prison  or  exile  could  not  cramp  or  crush  it;  never  so 
many  waves  of  bloody  persecution  could  not  quench  it.  Ah!  no 
indeed;  it  would  live  and  glow  with  purer  bliss  by  reason  of 
whatever  efforts  the  wrath  of  men  or  devils  might  seek  to  take  it 
away. 

23.  And  in  tliat  day  ye  shall  ask  me  iiotliiiig.  Verily, 
verily,  I  say  unto  you,  Whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  the  Father 
ill  my  name,  he  will  give  it  you. 

24.  Hitherto  have  ye  asked  nothing  in  my  name:  ask, 
and  ye  shall  receive,  that  your  joy  may  be  full. 

It  is  a  point  of  some  practical  importance  to  determine  whether 
in  the  words — "In  that  day  ye  shall  ask  me  nothing,"  Jesus 
meant  to  forbid  (or  even  advise  against)  the  address  of  prayer  to 
himself.  Does  the  antithesis  involved  in  this  verse  lie  between 
addressing  prayer  to  Jesus  on  the  one  hand  and  to  the  Father  in 
the  name  of  Jesus  on  the  other?  If  so,  and  if  the  words — "In 
that  day" — mean  not  only  "in"  but  evermore  after  that  day, 
then  prayer  should  not  be  addressed  directly  to  Christ,  but  always 
to  the  Father  in  the  name  of  Christ.  Is  this  the  Scripture  doc- 
trine, and  is  it  also  the  Apostolic  practice  ? 

This  question  stated  thus  broadly  we  may  wisely  defer  till 
we  have  examined  this  passage  in  its  connection.  Examining  it 
thus,  we  shall  see  that  "asking  Jesus"  had  been  an  every-day 
business  for  fully  three  years.  But  this  free,  face-to-face  ques- 
tioning was  about  to  close.  That  this  gives  the  sense  of  "asking 
me,"  in  v.  23,  is  made  more  than  probable  by  the  occurrence  of 
the  same  verb  in  this  sense,  v.  19 — only  four  verses  back;  "Jesus 
knew  that  they  were  desirous  to  ash  him."     This  unresti-ained 


248  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVI. 

freedom  of  question  had  been  the  law  of  their  life  under  their 
Great  Teacher.  Their  words  fell  on  his  earthly  ear;  his  replying 
words  fell  on  theirs.  But  after  his  ascension  this  form  of  asking 
Jesus  must  cease,  and  instead  of  it  must  come  praying  to  the  in- 
visible Father  in  the  name  of  that  Jesus  whom  they  had  been 
wont  to  ask  as  they  aa'ouM  while  visildy  present  with  him,  but 
whom  henceforward  they  must  think  of  as  having  passed  into  the 
heavens,  and  evermore  making  intercession  for  his  people  there. 
The  latter  method  of  obtaining  blessings  would  not  fall  in  any- 
wise below  the  former.  They  might  ask  the  Father  in  heaven  as 
freely  as  they  ever  had  the  Son  on  earth.  They  might  use  the 
name  of  Jesus  in  coming  to  the  Father  as  really  as  they  had  ever 
used  it  in  addressing  him  face  to  fixce.  The  methods  of  prayer 
[asking]  were  then  to  change:  "Hitherto  ye  have  not  asked  the 
Father  in  my  name;"  henceforward,  this  new  way  is  open;  "Ask 
and  receive,  that  your  joy  may  be  full." 

In  this  view  the  antithesis  lies  between  asking  Jesus  In  the 
freedom  of  personal  conversation  in  the  flesh  on  the  one  hand ; 
and  asking  the  invisilile  Father  hj  prayer  in  the  name  of  the  risen 
Jesus  on  the  other.  The  transition  from  the  former  method  to 
the  latter  was  then  just  at  hand,  and  nothing  could  be  more  nat- 
ural or  appropriate  than  fn*  Jesus  to  connect  the  former  method 
with  the  latter  by  ^^'ords  like  these.  It  Avould  help  them  to  real- 
ize how  freely  and  fully  they  might  still  and  evermore  present 
their  praj^ers  to  the  Father  in  the  name  of  Jesus. 

Under  this  construction  of  his  Avords  Jesus  did  not  intend  to  for- 
bid them  to  address  their  prayer  to  him  in  heaven  after  his  as- 
cension. They  certainly  did  not  understand  him  to  forbid  this,  for 
Stephen,  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  died  with  prayer  to  Jesus  on  his 
lips  (Acts  7:  59,  60),  and  so  current  was  this  practice  in  apostolic 
times  that  Paul  describes  Christians  thus ; — "All  that  in  every 
place  call  upon  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  "  (1  Cor.  1 :  2). 

25.  These  things  have  I  spoken  unto  you  in  proverbs :  but 
the  time  cometli,  when  I  shall  no  more  speak  unto  you  in 
proverbs,  but  I  shall  shew  you  jjlainly  of  the  Father. 

Speaking  "  in  proverbs  "  as  contrasted  with  speaking  "plainly" 
(both  in  V.  25  and  in  v.  29)  is  the  diflcrencc  between  using  figures 
of  speech,  illustrations;  e.  g.  of  the  "door"  to  the  sheep-fold;  of 
the  shepherd  and  his  sheep  (John  10) ;  or  of  the  vine  and  branches 
(John  15); — and  using  the  plainest  and  most  direct  Avords  for  the 

very  thing  intended. The  "  showing   plainly  of  the    Father  " 

must  be  referred  to  his  teaching  them  by  means  of  the  Comforter, 
the  Spirit  of  truth,  Avho,  as  saicl  above  (vs.  13-15),  would  reveal 
Jesus  to  them;  "  He  shall  receive  of  mine  and  shall  shoAV  it  unto 
you  " — more  plainly  than  his  OAvn  lips  had  ever  done. 

26.  At  that  clay  ye  shall  ask  in  my  name,  and  I  say  not 
unto  you,  that  I  will  pi'ay  the  Father  for  you : 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CILVr.  XVI.  249 

27.  For  the  Father  liimself  loveth  you,  because  ye  have 
loved  me,  and  have  believed  that  I  came  out  from  God. 

Here  we  must  notice  the  special  turn  of  thought :  "  T  say  not 
unto  you  that  I  will  pray  the  Father  for  j'ou."  Observe ;  Jesus 
does  not  say — I  shall  never  offer  such  prayer  in  your  behalf;  but 
lie  says  a  very  diiferent  thing  from  that.  He  means — I  would  not 
have  you  think  that  the  Father  has  no  love  for  you,  or  that  you 
will  get  his  ear  only  because  he  loves  me.  While  it  is  every  way 
proper  that  you  should  ask  in  my  name,  I  wish  you  to  know  that 
the  reason  for  your  praying  in  my  name  is  not  by  any  means  be- 
cause the  Father  has  personally  no  sympathy — no  love  for  you. 
He  certainly  has.  He  loves  you  as  truly  as  I  do.  He  loves  j^ou 
because  ye  have  loved  me,  and  because  ye  have  believed  that  I 
came  forth  from  Gud.  It  is  a  matter  of  profound  interest  to  him 
that  some  from  this  fallen  race  have  had  faith  in  his  mission  of 
his  Son  and  have  received  him  as  their  own  Savior;  have  learned 
of  the  Father  through  his  lips ;  have  believed  on  the  Father  by 
reason  of  what  they  have  learned  through  his  Son. 

28.  I  came  forth  from  the  Father,  and  am  come  into  the 
world:  again,  I  leave  the  world,  and  go  to  the  Father. 

29.  His  disciples  said  unto  him,  Lo,  now  speakcst  thou 
plainly,  and  speakest  no  proverb. 

30.  Now  are  we  sure  that  thou  knoAvest  all  things,  and 
needest  not  that  any  man  should  ask  thee :  by  this  we  be- 
lieve that  thou  earnest  forth  from  God. 

The  point  made  in  v.  28 — often  repeated  in  various  form — 
seems  now  at  length  to  be  understood  and  fixed  in  their  minds. 
Consequently  they  now  Iiave  a  broader  view  of  Christ's  foreknowl- 
edge and  a  deeper  sense  of  it;  which  serves  to  confirm  their 
faith  that  he  came  really  from  God. 

31.  Jesus  answered  them.  Do  ye  now  believe? 

32.  Behold,  the  hour  cometh,  yea,  is  now  come,  that  ye 
shall  be  scattered,  every  man  to  his  own,  and  shall  leave 
me  alone :  and  yet  I  am  not  alone,  because  the-Father  is 
with  me. 

33.  These  things  I  have  spoken  unto  you,  that  in  me  ye 
might  have  peace.  In  the  world  ye  shall  have  tribulation : 
l)ut  be  of  good  cheer;  I  have  overcome  the  world. 

No  doubt  Jesus  was  glad  of  this  apparent  quickening  of  their 
faith  in  himself; — but  Avere  theyaAvare  how  soon  and  how  sorely 
it  would  be  shaken  ?  It  may  be  well  to  remind  them  that  they 
are  on  the  eve  of  fearful  peril.  A  terrible  strain  upon  their  fidel- 
ity, courage,  and  practical  faith  in  him  would  presently  come 
upon  them.  They  would  be  scattered  every  man  to  his  old  home 
associates.     All    the  disciples  would   forsake  him  and   flee;  and 


250  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVII. 

Peter — alas  ! — but  he  had  ah-eady  told  thorn  of  his  coming  fall. 

But  observe  ;  Jesus  does  not  stop  here  to  rebuke  or  reproach 

them,  or  even  to  tell  them  how  deeply  he  should  be  grieved ;  but 
turns  the  course  of  thought.  "  Yet  I  am  not  alone  :  "  I  shall  not 
be  alone  when  ye  all  forsake  me ;  for  the  Father  is  and  will  still 
be  "with  me."  I  have  said  these  things  not  to'make  you  sad — 
not  to  rebuke  you  beforehand;  but  with  far  other  purpose;  viz. 
that  in  me  ye  might  have  peace.  I  did  long  to  assure  you  of 
my  love  and  sympathy,  though  I  have  in  my  eye  even  now  the 
fact  that  yc  all  are  soon  to  forsake  me  in  my  hour  of  bitterest 
woe. 

And  thus  this  series  of  conversations,  of  unparalleled  signifi- 
cance, of  inexpressible  sweetness — precious  above  all  other  words 
that  ever  fell  from  those  sacred  lips — came  to  its  close.  It  only 
remained  to  Jesus  to  pour  out  his  full  soul  in  prayer — prayer  for 
the  men  he  loved  most  tenderly  ;  for  men  whose  pending  perils 
he  foresaAV  clearly ;  whose  moral  frailties  lay  vividly  before  him, 
and  whose  need  of  help  from  above  he  therefore  saw  to  be  ex- 
ceedingl}^  great  and  demanding. 


ClIAPTEK   XYII. 

This  entire  chapter  is  prayer — the  longest  prayer  of  Jesus  on 
record  ;  ofi'ered  in  circumstances  of  the  deepest  interest  both  to 
himself  and  to  his  disciples.  Noticeably,  it  is  not  mainly  prayer 
for  himself — that  he  might  endure  to  the  end  and  drink  submis- 
sively the  cup  of  sorrows  soon  to  be  pressed  to  his  lips ;  but,  al- 
most exclusively,  it  is  prayer  for  his  beloved  disciples  whose  fore- 
seen perils  and  whose  moral  weaknesses  were  a  sore  burden  upon 
his  heart.  In  words  most  simple;  in  thoughts  most  weighty;  in 
choice  of  points  for  petition  embracing  with  wonderful  grasp  the 
grand  elements  of  the  Christian  life — this  prayer  for  every  reason 
commends'  itself  to  our  profoundest  study  and  contemplation. 

1.  These  words  spake  Jesus,  and  lifted  up  his  eyes  to 
heaven,  and  said,  Father,  the  hour  is  come :  gloriiy  thy 
Son,  that  thy  Son  also  may  glorify  thee. 

"  These  words "  are  those  recorded  in  chap.  13-16.  Having 
uttered  these,  he  passed  naturally  to  prayer.  Ilis  full  heart  de- 
manded this  expression  of  its  yearning,  longing  desires  for  his 
people.  "Father" — no  form  of  address  could  be  more  appro- 
priate— Oh  thou  universal  Father — in  the  highest  sense  my 
Father; — as  such  I  now  come  to  Thee.  It  should  be  noted  that 
the  first  five  verses  are  specially  jDcrsonal  to  Jesus  himself,  ex- 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVII.  251 

prcsslnghis  own  individual  relations  to  the  Father. "Thchoiir 

has  come;" — the  hour  long  anticipated,  most  eventful,  toward 
which  my  whole  earthly  life  has  looked  and  all  its  labors  have 
been  shaped — this  great  hour  of  crisis,  of  issues,  of  consumma- 
tion— of  trial,  pain,  arrest,  torture,  conflict  with  Satan,  death,  res- 
urrection, ascension,  triumph,  eternal  glory — how  do  the  grand 
issues  of  my  earthly  mission  culminate  upon  this  momentous 
hour!  and  yet  though  these  issues,  specially  personal  to  Jesus  were 
so  absorbing,  another  class  of  interests  are  hero  perhaps  even 
more  pressing — those  of  his  little  flock,  for  they  are  to  be  left 
among  devouring  wolves — their  shepherd  smitten  and  the  sheep 
scattered  ;  their  faith  fearfully  tried  ;  their  souls  perplexed,  be- 
wildered, staggered; — Oh,  how  could  their  compassionate  Master 
leave  them  without  pouring  out  the  prayer  of  his  burdened  heart 
in  their  behalf! 

"  Glorify  thy  Son."  We  pause  in  the  presence  of  this  petition. 
No  other  spirit  save  one  of  profoundest  reverence  befits  us  when 
we  assume  to  interpret  such  words  uttered  by  the  glorious  Son 
of  God.  Yet  they  are  here  to  be  studied  and  to  be  understood  as 
best  we  may.  It  seems  to  me  supremely  important  that  our  ap- 
prehension of  their  meaning  should  be  at  once  clear  ix,nA.just. 

We  recognize  Jesus  who  offers  this  prayer  as  "  God  manifest 
in  human  flesh,"  meaning  by  this  that  the  divine  person,  named 
in  this  gospel  by  Joliu  "  the  Word  "  [Logos]  became  mysteriously 

united  with  the  human  person,  born  of  Mary. These  points 

are  brought  to  view  here  only  as  bearing  upon  the  prayer  of  Je- 
sus. Do  we  not  make  some  advance  in  our  conception  of  his 
prayer  when  Ave  consider  that  in  its  very  nature  and  relations 
prayer  is  of  man — is  human;  and  that,  consequently,  as  offered 
by  Jesus  it  assumes  that  his  human  consciousness  is  in  the  fore- 
ground and  is  made  specially  prominent? With  this  view,  I 

suggest  whether  we  should  not  interpret  the  prayer — "  Glorify 
thy  Son  " — to  mean  not  merely — Lift  him  at  once  from  his  earthly 
humiliation  to  his  heavenly  glory  ;  but  rathei- — Bear  him  through 
these  scenes  of  his  earthly  trial,  now  instantly  pending:  help 
him  to  be  true  to  his  mission  of  suffering,  shame,  and  death  ;  to 
drink  the  cup  of  Avoe  which  Thou,  Father,  hast  given  him  to 
drink :  strengthen  him  that  through  thy  help  he  may  manifest  be- 
fore the  universe  thy  love  for  lost  men,  and  may  glorify  Thee 
amid  this  fearful  ordeal  of  torture  and  temptation.  Glorify  thy 
Son  by  making  him  more  than  conqueror  through  these  last  and 
sorest  conflicts,  so  that  he  may  glorify  Thee— fitly  representing 
thy  love  for  those  in  whose  behalf  he  dies. 

2.  As  thou  hast  given  him  power  over  all  flesh,  that  he 
should  give  eternal  life  to  as  many  as  thou  hast  given  him. 

The  firstword  in  this  verse  "  as"  [better  read  according  as]  is 
specially  significant  because  it  logically  connects  the  words  that 
follow  with  those  that  precede.     Be  pleased  to  answer  my  prayer, 


252  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVII. 

"Glorify  thy  Son,"  in  accordance  ivith  that  grant  of  po\yer  over 
all  the  race  conferred  on  him  to  the  end  that  lie  might  give  eter- 
nal life,  etc.  As  the  Father  had  endo^ved  the  Son  with  this 
power  over  human  souls,  in  the  realms  of  providence  and  grace, 
for  the  grand  purposes  of  salvation — the  salvation  of  the  "  given" 
ones — all  who  are  really  saved  at  last — so  now  in  this  hour  of 
crisis  he  prays  to  be  girded  with  strength  to  bear  and  to  go  tri- 
umphantly through  these  scenes  of  fiercest  conflict  and  of  most 
perilous  responsibility.  Now  if  ever  [he  would  say],  O  my 
Father,  I  need  thy  sustaining  hand  that  I  may  truly  honor  thee. 
Only  with  thy  present  help  can  I  meet  this  fearful  crisis  with 
honor  to  thee  and  to  myself  Thou  knowest  well  the  work  I  have 
undertaken — this  giving  eternal  life  to  all  whom  Thou  hast  given 
to  me. In  support  of  his  plea  it  was  in  place  as  an  indirect  ar- 
gument to  suggest  this  final  purpose — the  eternal  life  of  the 
"  given  "  ones — and  to  refer  thus  to  the  f\ict  that  they  had  been 
given  by  the  Father.  He  was  thus  an  interested  party.  His 
hand  and  counsel  were  in  the  scheme.  Jesus  asked  only  that  he 
might  be  sustained  to  carry  through  a  scheme  which  had  its  ori- 
gin in  the  Father's  love — for  the  accomplishment  of  which  the 
Father  had  already  given  him  "  jiower  over  all  flesh."  He  now 
needs   and  asks  more  blessings   in  the  same  line,  on  the  same 

principle,  for  the  same  ultimate  purpose. The  Greek  reader 

Avould  notice  that  for  the  words  translated — "as  many  as" — he 
finds  the  Greek  Avord  for  all  in  its  neuter  form — the  precise  sense 
being  therefore — to  the  mass,  thought  of  as  a  body — a  tvhole. 

3.  And  this  is  life  eternal,  that  they  might  know  thee,  the 
only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ,  Avhom  thou  hast  sent. 

That  "life  eternal"  which  he  is  to  give  to  believers,  in  its 
simplest  conception,  is  the  practical  knowledge  of  God  the 
Father  and  of  his  Son.  It  is  not  merely  to  know  that  Jehovah 
is  the  one  true  God  and  that  Jesus  is  his  Son;  but  to  Jxiwio  them 
as  snch.  Of  course  such  knowing  involves  the  adjusting  of  the 
heart  and  of  the  life  to  this  knowledge.  It  signifies  that  what  is 
thus  known  of  God  and  of  his  Son  is  received  in  love ;  is  wrought 
into  the  very  life  of  the  soul;  develoiDs  the  spirit  of  loving  obe- 
dience, and  the  simple  trust  of  faith — so  that  thus  knowing  God 
intelligently,  they  become  in  spirit  and  life  his  children  through 
the  salvation  provided  in  Jesus  his  Son.  The  word  "know" 
thus  used  becomes  signally  emphatic,  or  shall  we  say,  all-compre- 
hensive; inclusive  of  the  moral  acts  and  states  to  which  such 
knowledge  legitimately  tends.  It  is  the  knowledge  of  truth, 
made  effective  by  the  Spirit  of  truth,  according  to  the  legitimate 
potency  of  such  truth,  so  that  the  human  heart  yields  itself  to 
its  molding  power. 

4.  I  have  glorified  thee  on  the  earth  :  I  have  finished  the 
work  "which  thou  gayest  me  to  do. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVI r.  253 

So  far  I  have  done  the  work  undertaken,  to  the  honor  of  the 
Father.  This  was  his  sustaining  consciousness,  and  seems  here 
to  be  made  the  basis  for  the  plea  that  follows  : — "  Glorify  tluju 
me,"  etc.  (v.  5). At  this  point  the  great  work  was  mostly  fin- 
ished, yet  not  entirely.  The  last  Avords  of  Jesus  on  the  cross  as 
reported  by  John  were — "It  is  finished"  (19:  30).  Then  the 
suffering  was  indeed  endured  ;  all  that  belonged  to  the  stage  of 
humiliation  was  j^ast,  and  only  the  glory  reuuiined.* 

5.  And  now,  O  Fatlior,  glorify  thou  me  with  tlaine  own 
self  with  the  glory  which  I  had  with  thee  before  the  world 
was. 

In  the  interpretation  of  the  words  (v.  ]) — ^"  Glorify  thy  Son," 
there  seems  good  reason  to  refer  them  in  part  (yet  perhaps  only 
in  part)  to  blessings  needed  in  the  immediate  future,  for  whatever 
of  endurance  and  trial  lay  directly  before  the  Great  Sufferer. 
The  allusion  to  the  "  power  over  all  flesh  "  as  given  him,  seemed 
to  contemplate  more  blessings  of  similar  sort,  needful  to  perfect 
the  entire  work  undertaken  for  the  salvation  of  men.  But  in 
this  vei'se  (as  in  v.  4)  Jesus  seems  to  stand  in  thought  at  the 
point  of  consummation,  where  he  looks  upon  the  period  of  his 
humiliation  as  closing,  and  lifts  up  his  prayer  for  the  glory  that 
lay  beyond.     15ring  me  home  to  that  glory  in  which  1  dwelt  with 

thee  in  the  eternal  ages  before  this  world's  creation. "  With 

thine  own  self"  is  not  equivalent  to — by  thine  oion  power — but 
means,  along  tvith  thyself  liaise  me  to  that  former  position  of 
coequal  dignity  and  glory  in  which  I  dwelt  from  eternity  "  with 
God."  Closely  construed  it  Avould  seem  that  in  this  prayer  the 
divine — not  the  human — ^consciousness  is  in  the  foreground — the 
word  "  I  "  in  the  ^^hrase — "  which  1  had  with  Thee  " — represent- 
ing the  Logos  especially;  the  eternal  Word,  who  was  from  the  be- 
ginning "  with  God."  f 

6.  I  have  manife.?ted  thy  name  unto  the  men  which  thou 
gavest  me  out  of  the  world:  thine  they  were,  and  thou 
gavest  them  me  :  and  they  have  kept  thy  Avord. 

7.  Now  they  have  known  that  all  things  whatsoever  thou 
hast  given  me  are  of  thee. 

8.  For  I  have  given  unto  them  the  words  which  thou 
gavest  me ;  and  they  have  received  them,  and  have  known 
surely  that  I  came  out  from  thee,  and  they  have  believed 
that  thou  didst  send  me. 

*  The  improved  text  puts  the  verb  "  finished  "  in  the  form  of  its 
participle — "  Having  finished  the  work,"  etc. 

tThis  view  of  tlie  divine  personality  as  prominent  in  this  prayer, 
must  be  taken  unless  we  adopt  the  opinion  held  by  some  that  the 
human  nature  of  Jesus  also,  as  well  as  the  divine,  was  pre-existent 
— "  before  the  world  was." 


254  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVII. 

From  this  point  onward  Jesus  prays  especially  for  his  people. 
■ "Manifested  thy  name" — in  the  sense  of  thyself,  thy  char- 
acter, and  particularly  thy  great  love  and  thoughts  of  mercy  for 
lost  men.  To  those  whom  the  Father  had  given  him  had  these 
revelations  of  God  hcen  made.  All  others  had  repelled  his  teach- 
ings. This  mode  of  putting  the  case  kept  prominent  the  an- 
tecedent agency  of  the  Father  in  regard  to  the  salvation  of 
Christ's  people  and  made  that  agency  an  argument  in  his  plea. 

"  They  have  kept  thy  word  " — revealed  to  them  through  my 

ministry.     Now  therefore  thou  wilt  surely  remember  them  with 

mercy  in  their  present  and  pending  emergencies. "All  things 

Avhich  Thou  hast  given  me  " — both  words  to  be  spoken  and  deeds 
to  be  done  (miracles  included)  are  of  Thee.  They  have  joyfully 
recognized  this.     The  words  which  Jesus  had  received  from  the 

Father  for  men,  they  had  accepted    in   faith    and    in   love. 

"Rave  known  surely" — were  better  read — not  "surely,"  but 
truthfully — the  point  being  not  so  much  the  certainty  as  the 
correctness — the  exact  conformity  to  the  truth.  The  points 
stated  here  as  truthfully  known  are  put  in  two  forms,  essen- 
tially equivalent;  viz.  that  1  came  out  from  God;  and  that  Thou 
(God)  didst  send  me. 

9.  I  pray  for  tliem :  I  pray  not  for  the  Avorkl,  but  for ' 
tliem  ■which  thou  hast  given  me ;  for  they  are  thine. 

10.  And  all  mine  are  thine,  and  thine  are  mine;  and  I 
am  glorified  in  them. 

Should  this  negative  statement — "  not  for  the  world  " — be  con- 
strued in  its  fullest  and  most  absolute  sense — never,  at  all ;  or, 
only  in  a  qualified  sense — e.  g.  I  am  not  praying  for  the  world 
now,  or  not  for  them  specially  :  but  I  do  pray  specially  for  these 
my  disciples. The  latter  view  seems  to  me  the  true  one,  in- 
asmuch as  below  (vs.  21,  23)  Jesus  expresses  a  real  interest  for 
the  world — "  that  the  Avorld  may  believe  that  thou  hast  sent  me;  " 
"  that  the  world  may  know."  Moreover,  elsewhere  the  broadest 
benevolence  is  affirmed ; — "  God  so  loved  the  world,"  etc.  (John 
3  :  16).  "  God  sent  not  his  Son  into  the  world  to  condemn  the 
world,  but  that  the  woidd  through  him  might  be  saved,"  etc. 
(John  3 :    17).      It  seems    legitimate    therefore  to  construe  this 

prayer  thus  :   I  pray  now  especially  for  them. A  prominent 

point  in  this  plea  is  that  these  men  had  been  given  to  him  by 
the  Father — really  belonged  to  the  Father  ("they  are  thine"), 
and  indeed  belonged  by  the  same  tenure  to  both  the  Father  and 
the  Son — each  having  in  them  a  common  right  of  property.  Of 
course  this  conception  of  property  is  borrowed  from  human  re- 
lationships; but  is  at  once  clear  in  its  significance  and  precious 
in  its  bearings. 

11.  And  now  I  am  no  more  in  the  world,  but  these  are 
in  the  world,   and  I  come  to   thee.     Holy  Father,   keep 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVII.  255 

tlirougli  thine  own  name  those  -whom  thou  hast  given  nic, 
that  they  niay  be  one,  as  we  are. 

12.  While  I  was  with  them  in  the  world,  I  kept  them  in 
thy  name :  those  that  thou  gavest  me  I  have  ke])t,  and 
none  of  them  is  lost,  but  the  son  of  perdition ;  that  the 
Scripture  might  be  fulfilled. 

Here  then  is  property  jointly  owr.cd  by  the  Father  and  the 
Son,  to  be  taken  care  of.  Jesus  has  had  them  in  special  charge 
Avhile  with  them  in  the  flesh  :  but  he  is  now  to   go  from  them 

to  the  Father.     Hence  he  prays  the  Father  to  keep  them. It 

is  not  quite  clear  what  our  English  translators  meant  by  the 
word  "  ihroi(f/h" — "through  thine  own  name."  Usually  this 
I^reposition  sigiufies — by  means  of ;  but  in  this  case  it  translates 
the  Greek  word  for  in — the  very  same  which  in  the  next  verse 
they  have  translated  "in" — "  I  kept  them  in  thy  name."  There 
can  be  no  good  reason  for  translating  the  same  word  "through" 

in  V.  11  and  "in"  in  v.  12. Moreover,  not  only  is  the  Greek 

original  the  same,  but  the  connection  and  relations  are  the 
same.  Jesus  prays  to  the  Father  to  do  precisely  Avhat  he  him- 
self has  been  doing.  "  While  I  was  with  them  I  kept  in  thy 
name ;  "  now  that  I  leave  them,  I  pray  thee  to  keep  them  in  thy 
name.  The  sense  therefore  must  be — keep  them  in  the  knowl- 
edge and  love  of  thy  name — "  name  "  being  synonymous  with  re- 
vealed character. 

We  must  note  also  that  in  both  v.  11  and  v.  12  the  improved  text 
gives  us — not  "  those  whom"  (masculine  plural),  but  ivhich  (neu- 
ter singular),  referring  to  name,  the  sense  being — thine  own  name 
which  thou  hast  given  me.  Then  v.  12,  closely  translated,  would 
be — "  While  I  was  with  them  1  was  keeping  them  in  thy  name 
which  [name]  thou  gavest  me,  and  I  guarded  [them]  and  none 
of  them  is  lost,"  etc.  He  had  kept  all  of  them  safely  in  the 
knowledge  of  his  Father's  name,  except  the  traitor,  in  the  loss  of 
whom  the  Scripture  was  fulfilled. 

13.  And  now  come  I  to  thee ;  and  these  things  I  speak  in 
the  world,  that  they  might  have  my  joy  fulfilled  in  them- 
selves. 

I  say  these  things  in  the  world,  while  yet  with  them  in  the 
flesh,  in  order  that  they  may  have  in  full  measure  the  same  joy 
in  thee  which  I  have.  This  must  be  the  sense  of  "  w.y  joy  " — the 
very  joy  wdiich  I  have  in  my  Father.  I  wish  to  show  them  that 
they  may  love  and  trust  the  Father  even  as  I  have  done  and  may 

have  the  same  joy  which  I  ever  have  in  this  love  and  trust. 

Would  not  this  be  a  blessed  experience? 

14.  I  have  given  them  thy  word;  and  the  world  hath 
hated  them,  becanse  they  are  not  of  the  world,  even  as  I  am 
not  of  the  world. 


253  GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVII. 

T  have  given  them  thy  word  and  so  have  kept  them.  But  now 
that  I  leave  them,  new  dangers  Avill  beset  them  from  external 
sources — i.  e.  from  a  hostile  world,  hating  them  because  they  are 
not  of  it  as  I  am  not.  Both  they  and  I  are  of  another  class,  hav- 
ing no  sympathies  in  common  with  a  selfish,  wicked  world. 

15.  I  pray  not  that  thou  shouldcst  take  them  out  of  the 
world,  hut  that  thou  shouldest  keej)  them  from  the  evil. 

16.  They  are  not  of  the  world,  even  as  I  am  not  of  the 
woj-ld. 

It  might  seem  a  very  simple  and  perfect  protection  for  them 
to  take  "them  out  of  the  Avorld,  but  we  are  not  ready  for  that.  1 
do  not  pray  for  that;  but  that  thou  shouldest  keep  them  from 
the  Ecil  One — not  from  evil  in  the  abstract,  but  from  the  IMaster 
Spirit  of  evil— Satan — who  has  always  fought  me  and  will  fight 

them. In   1   John  2:  13,    our  translators  have   rendered   the 

same  Greek  Avords  as  these  (both  the  noun  and  the  article) — "Ye 
have  overcome  the  Vricked  One.''  Both  consistency  and  phil- 
ology required  that  they  should  translate  this  passage  in  the  same 
way. 

17.  Sanctify  them  through  ihy  truth  :  thy  word  is  truth. 

INIake  and  keep  thorn  holy  through  thy  truth — that  of  thy  re- 
vealed word.  We  need  not  construe  this  prayer  to  exclude  the 
agency  of  the  Spirit.  Let  it  rather  include  this  agency,  since  the 
Comforter  is  evermore  the  Spirit  of  truth,  teaching,  suggesting, 
impressing,  fulfilling   his   functions   as  a  Sanctifier  by  means  of 

God's  revealed  word  of  truth. Sanctifying  human  souls  should 

not  be  considered  a  mystical  process,  in  such  a  sense  mysterious 
that  we  can  get  no  clearly  defined  conceptions  of  it.  Far  other- 
wise. The  fact  that  it  is  effected  "  throvgh  the  trutli"  brings  it 
within  the  pale  of  our  own  consciousness — a  subject  of  study 
and  of  distinct  intellectual  apprehension.  To  assume  it  to  be  a 
mystical  operation  can  never  be  otherwise  than  misleading  and 
pernicious. 

18.  As  thou  hast  sent  me  into  the  world,  even  so  have  I 
also  sent  them  into  the  world. 

On  essentially  the  same  mission,  viz:  to  testify  for  God;  to  re- 
veal God  to  men ;  and  at  this  point,  especially  to  preach  the  gos- 
pel. Jesus  could  not  have  meant  that  they  had  the  same  work 
as  himself  in  dying  to  make  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  world; 
but — as  to  the  point  then  present  in  thought — viz  :  the  agency 
of  revealed  truth  to  sanctify  and  save  men — their  work  was  sub- 
stantially a  continuation  of  his.  As  the  Father  had  sent  him 
with  great  and  glorious  messages  of  truth  to  men,  so  did  he  send 
them. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVII.  257 

in.  And  for  tlielr  sakes  I  sanctify  myself,  that  tliey  also 
might  be  sanctified  through  the  truth. 

As  applied  to  Jesus,  the  word  "sanctify"  must  have  its  primary, 
not  its  secondary  sense — the  primary  beinj^ — to  set  apart  for  holy 
purposes;  the  secondary — to  purify  from  sin.  Only  in  the  former 
sense  could  it  be  used  of  Jesus.  13ut  it  might  be  used  as  to  his 
disciples  in  both  senses  or  in  either.  Jesus  meant  to  say  that  he 
set  himself  apart  with  supreme  devotion  to  the  sanctification  of 
his  people — the  purifying  of  their  hearts  by  faith — which  is 
equivalent  to  saying  "through  the  trxiihr  Faith  stands  related 
to  truth.  Faith  receives  the  word  of  God  as  true,  and  thus  se- 
cures to  the  believer  the  legitimate  moral  forces  of  truth. 

20.  Neither  pray  I  for  tliese  alone,  but  for  them  also 
which  shall  believe  on  me  through  their  word  ; 

21.  That  they  all  may  be  one;  as  thou,  Father,  a)-t  ia  me, 
and  I  in  thee,  that  tliey  also  may  be  one  ia  us:  that  the 
world  may  believe  that  thou  hast  seat  me. 

22.  And  the  glory  which  thou  gavest  me  I  have  given 
them;  that  they  may  be  one,  evea  as  we  are  one: 

23.  I  in  them,  and  thou  in  me,  that  they  may  be  made 
perfect  in  one;  and  that  the  world  may  know  that  thou  hast 
sent  me,  and  hast  loved  them,  as  thou  hast  loved  me. 

Xot  for  these  eleven  disciples  alone  do  I  pray,  hut  for  all  who 
shall   come   into   faith   through   their   preaching,   onward   down 

through  all  the  ages. For  what  does  he  pray,  in  their  behalf? 

"That  they  all  may  be  one;"  this  is  the  burden  of  the  prayer — 
illustrated,  reiterated,  and  its  anticipated  results  stated — viz : 
"  that  the  world  may  believe,"  etc. ^Yhat  then  is  this  oneness? 

Something  more  and  better  than  a  denominational,  organic 
unity  of  the  church,  as  opposed  to  diverse  organizations.  It 
might  involve  this  by  involving  and  including  the  spirit  which 
would  insure  it;  but  this  precisely  and  this  only  it  can  not  be. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  passage  that  suggests  this  as  the  main 
idea.  There  was  nothing  in  the  circumstances  of  Jesus  at  that 
moment  which  would  naturally  bring  this  sort  of  oneness  before 
his  mind.  The  entire  description  with  its  illustration  leads  to  a 
different  and  vastly  higher  view;  "As  thou.  Father,  art  in  me  and 
I  in  thee;  that  they  also  may  be  one  in  us."  There  can  be  no 
simpler  way  to  indicate  entire  unity — perfect  oneness — than  this — 
one  person  ia  another.  We  need  not  push  the  sense  of  the 
word  "in"  so  far  as  to  constitute  identity  and  to  absorb  and 
rule  out  individual  personality.  Stopping  short  of  this,  it  gives  us 
the  completest  conception  of  moral  oneness  which  human  lan- 
guage can  express.  Morally,  Jesus  and  the  Father  were  at  one: 
the  same  love,  the  same  purity,  the  same  glorious  spiritual  life, 
lived  and  reigned  in  each  and  in  both.     The  prayer  of  Jesus  is 


258  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVII. 

that  liis  people  may  all  be  one  in  us  (the  Father  and  the  Son)  in 

the  same  sense  of  moral,  spiritual  union. "  The  glory"  (v.  22) 

must  refer  to  that  honor,  dignity,  exaltation,  which  the  Father  had 
prospectively  given  to  the  Son ;  to  which  the  Son  was  soon  to  be 
raised. — "This"  Jesus  saj^s,  "I  have  given  to  them  as  thou  hast 
given  it  to  me."  The  bestowment  of  this  glory  would  still  con- 
duce to  the  same  great  end — moral,  spiritual  oneness;  would  be 
given  for  the  sake  of  this  result — "that  they  may  be  one,  even  as 
we  are  one." Still  the  precious  idea  is  expanded  and  reiter- 
ated; "I  in  them  and  thou  in  me,  that  they  may  be  made  perfect 
in  one."  Is  it  not  worthy  of  special  thought  that  here  this  oneness 
(if  we  may  coin  a  word)  is  not  put  as  reciprocal — (I  in  them  and 
they  in  me ;  I  in  thee,  Father,  and  thou  in  me) — but  in  each  case 
the  greater  is  in  the  less — the  superior  is  in  the  inferior;  for  the 
Father  is  said  to  be  in  the  Son  and  the  Son  also  is  in  his  people. 
The  higher  condescends  to  come  down  and  manifest  his  presence 
and  power  in  the  lower,  obviously  to  uplift — to  raise  up  into  a 
higher  plane  of  spiritual  communion  and  fellowship.  As  the 
Father  brings  himself  into  spiritual  communion  with  the  Son 
(considered  as  incarnate),  so  does  the  Son  bring  himself  into 
spiritual  communion  with  his  people.  This  constitutes  Jesus  the 
connecting  link — the  uniting  agent — between  the  Father  and  each 

true  believer. When  the  lower  is  spoken  of  as  in  the  higher; 

as  for  example,  believers  are  said  to  be  in  Christ  as  branches  are 
in  the  vine,  the  connection  is  specially  one  of  faith,  dependence, 
trust  on  their  part,  bringing  them  into  such  relations  to  Jesus  that 
currents  of  sustaining  life-power  flow  from  hiiu  to  them,  as  from 
the  parent  vine  to  the  inhering  branches;  or  as  the  vital  nervous 
force  flows  from  the  brain  [the  head]  through  the  entire  human 
organism  [all  the  members].  But  in  our  passage  the  mode  of 
stating  the  law  of  spiritual  union — i.  e.  the  higher  party  in  the 
lower — makes  prominent  the  idea  of  condescengion — of  coming 
down  to  lift  up  the  relatively  lower  party  into  the  relationship  of 
sublime  communion  and  fellowship — a  communion  born  of  divine 
love  and  made  effective  through  the  sanctifying  agency  of  God's 
truth  and  Spirit.  Human  souls  made  in  God's  image  are  inspir- 
ahle — capable  by  virtue  of  their  created  constitution,  of  being 
pervaded  and  permeated  thus  with  God.  No  higher  quality — ca- 
pabilit}'^ — than  this  in  man's  nature  can  possibly  be  conceived  of. 

A  noticeable  addition  is  made  (v.  23)  to  the  clause — "that 

tlie  world  may  know  that  thou  hast  sent  me;"  viz:  "And  hast 
loved  them  as  thou  hast  loved  me."  Exalting  them  to  the  same 
heavenly  glory  with  Jesus  would  serve  to  show  this.  But  going 
deeper  than  this  external  glorifying,  and  contemplating  the  moral, 
spiritual  renovation  of  their  natures,  and  consequently  the  bringing 
them  into  moral  oneness  with  Jesus  and  with  the  Father,  we  shall 
see  that  this  must  testify  to  the  same  love  of  the  Father  toAvard 
them  as  toward  his  Sou. Is  not  all  this  surpassingly  wonderful? 

24.  Father,  I  will  that  they  also,  whom  thou  hast  given 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAR  XVII.  259 

me,  be  ■with  me  where  I  am;  that  they  may  behold  my 
glory,  which  thoii  hast  given  me:  for  thou  lovedst  me  be- 
fore the  foundation  of  the  world. 

The  genuine  tenderness,  sincerity  and  condescension  of  Christ's 
love  for  his  people  could  not  easily  be  put  in  more  touching  form 
than  this  :  1  would  have  them  very  near  me — with  me — so  that 
they  may  behold  my  glory  which  thou  hast  given  me.  I  know 
they  will  enjoy  it.'  I  too  shall  rejoice  to  see  them  enjoy  it.  Hu- 
man friendships  are  full  of  such  manifestations.  Who  does  not 
love  to  have  his  personal  friends  see  and  sympathize  with  his  own 
honors — his  real  and  worthy  success  in  his  labors?  IIow  then 
could  Jesus  show  his  disciples  more  clearly  that  he  holds  them 
as  his  beloved,  confidential  friends,  than  by  this  prayer  that 
they  may  rise  to  behold  his  own  eternal  glory  and  rejoice  with 
him  in  his  immortal  honors  and  triumphs  ? 

25.  O  righteous  Father,  the  world  hath  not  known  thee : 
but  I  have  known  thee,  and  these  have  known  that  thou 
hast  sent  me. 

Why  does  Jesus  choose  the  word  "righteous"  to  apply  to  the 

Father  in  this  connection? 1  suggest  this:  that  "  righteous  " 

involves  moral  discrimination  between  good  and  evil ;  good-doers 
and  evil  doors.  The  thought — underlying  and  implied — may  be 
this  :  1  have  prayed  that  these  whom  thou  hast  given  me — sancti- 
fied through  thy  truth — may  be  with  me  in  my  heavenly  glory. 

W"hy  do  1  not  ask  the  same  for  all  the  world  ? A  righteous  God 

could  not  grant  it.  "  O  righteous  Father,  the  world  have  not 
known  thee."  They  would  not  receive  my  testimony  of  thee; 
they  have  loved  darkness  rather  than  light  because  their  deeds 
are  evil.  There  can  be  no  home  for  them  in  the  pure  and  glori- 
ous heaven.  "  But  I  have  known  thee,  and  these  have  known 
that  thou  hast  sent  me,"  and  therefore  are  preparing  to  know  thee 
with  the  perfect  knowledge  of  heaven. 

26.  And  I  have  declared  unto  them  thy  name,  and  will 
declare  it;  that  the  love  ■wherewith  thou  hast  loved  n\e  may 
be  in  them,  and  I  in  them. 

I  have  begun  already  to  reveal  the  Father  to  them  :  I  have 
more  yet  to  reveal  ajid  to  manifest  to  their  obedient  and  loving 
hearts.  I  shall  pursue  this  work  to  the  end  that  the  love  thou 
hast  for  me  may  go  forth  also  toward  them — that  thou  mayest 
love  them  as  thou  hast  loved  me ;  also  that  I  myself  may  be  in 
them  in  yet  greater  perfection. 

Thus  closes  this  wonderful,  glorious  prayer.  Were  truths  more 
sublime  ever  uttered,  or  thoughts  more  inspiring  to  Christian 
souls,  or  more  consoling  to  men  looking  forward  to  perils  and 
conflicts  which  might  be  unto  death?  Studying  it  as  heard  by 
the  chosen  few^  in  that  eventful  moment,  we  can  scarcely  restrain 


260  GOSPEL   OF   JOHN.— CHAP.  XVIII. 

the  inquiry — Did  they  comprehend  the  grandeur  of  these  senti- 
ments and  feel  the  mighty  inspiration  of  such  sj-mpathy,  and 
Avere  their  souls  lifted  up  by  the  anticipation  of  such  communion 
and  fellowship  with  the  risen  Jesus  and  with  the  Infinite  Father? 
Did  they  say  within  themselves — Now  we  can  endure  any  thing 
bra^^ely  for  such  a  Friend  ;  now  we  can  surely  count  it  all  joy  to 
go  with  him  to  prison  and  to  death  for  the  love  we  bear  him  and 
for  the  glory  that  is  so  soon  to  follow  ? 

We  can  not  know  precisely  what  the  then  present  impression 
of  this  prayer  was  upon  the  disciples ;  but  we  may  doubtless  be- 
lieve that  after  Jesus  had  gone  up  into  heaven  before  their  eyes 
and  the  Spirit  began  to  bring  these  things  to  their  remembrance, 
then  they  began  indeed  to  drink  in  their  gi-and  inspirations,  and 
to  feel  their  sustaining  powei*.  Jt  is  sweet  to  think  how  the  peo- 
ple of  God  all  down  the  ages  have  delighted  to  read  the  words  of 
this  2"'ra3'er  and  to  feel  the  spiritual  power  thereof. 


o>Koo 


CHAPTER    XVIIT. 

This  chapter  and  the  next  comprise  the  selection  made  by  John, 
from  the  historic  incidents  of  the  Savior's  passion,  including  his 
arrest,  trial,  crucifixion  and  burial.  P^ach  of  the  four  gospel  his- 
torians has  made  his  own  several  selection  from  among  this  group 
of  incidents,  Matthew  and  Mark  following  with  slight  variations 
the  same  general  principle  of  selection,  so  that  in  the  main  their 
accounts  ai'e  parallel  with  each  other  ;  while  Luke  and  John  each 
contain  a  considerable  amount  of  new  matter,  peculiar  to  them- 
selves. Hence  it  is  only  by  bringing  these  several  histories  to- 
gether and  allowing  them  to  supplement  each  other  that  we  get 
the  full  view  of  what  is  revealed  in  respect  to  the  final  passion 
of  the  world's  Great  Sufferer. 

Much  the  same  might  be  said  of  any  other  considerable  chap- 
ter of  our  gospel  history,  and  being  said,  might  become  an  argu- 
ment for  treating  it  in  this  complementary  method.  Thus  far  in 
this  volume  I  have  confined  myself  mainly  to,  the  record  given  us 
by  John.  In  treating  the  two  chapters  next  ensuing,  I  propose 
to  notice  briefly  those  main  points  of  the  history  which,  being 
omitted  or  less  fully  stated  by  John,  are  brought  out  more  fully 
by  the  other  historians.     I  am  induced  to  adopt  this  method  by 

the  exceeding  great  interest  and   importance  of  the  subject. 

^loreover  what  John  has  said  will  be  better  understood  when  sup- 
plemented from  the  parallel  records.  There  is  the  more  reason 
for  this  course  in  a  commentary  upon  these  chapters  of  John  be- 
cause it  is  more  apparent  here  than  elsewhere  in  this  book  that 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVlir.— GETIISE.MANE.    261 

he  regarded  it;  as  only  supplementary — i.  e.  wrote  it,  aware  of 
what  others  bad  written  before  hiui,  and  therefore  (probably) 
omitted  certain  things  because  they  had  been  fully  recorded  al- 
ready by  his  brethren. 

This  chap.  18  gives  the  scenes  of  the  arrest  (vs.  1-14) ;  the 
course  of  Peter,  resulting  in  his  sad  denial  of  his  Master  (vs.  IS- 
IS, and  25-27) ;  and  in  part,  the  incidents  of  the  trial  before  the 
high  priest  and  before  Pilate  (vs.  19-24,  and  28-40). 

1.  When  Jesus  had  spoken  these  words,  he  went  foi'th 
Avith  his  disciples  over  the  brook  Cedron,  where  was  a  gar- 
den, into  the  which  he  entered,  and  his  disciples. 

This  passing  over  the  brook  Cedron  (otherwise  Kidron)  which 
skirted  the  city  on  the  east,  brought  them  to  the  foot  of  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  and  to  that  ever  memorable  garden  known  in 
the  other  evangelists  as  Gethsemane.  The  word  "  garden " 
should  not  suggest  here  a  spot  under  cultivation  for  vegetables, 
flowers,  and  perhaps  summer  fruits;  but  rather,  an  orchard — in 
this  case  devoted,  as  we  may  infer  from  the  significant  name,  to 
the  olive.  It  was  a  sweet  and  calm  retreat  fi'om  the  turmoil  of 
the  great  city,  perhaps  under  the  care  of  some  well-known 
friend,  but  at  least  a  place  often  frequented  by  Jesus  and  his  dis- 
ciples, and  as  we  may  well  suppose,  sacred  to  the  double  purpose 
of  rest  and  of  prayer.  This  was  Gethsemane.  Here,  there  fell 
upon  the  human  soul  of  Jesus  that  mighty  agony  which  human 
language  seems  to  falter  in  every  attempt  to  describe.  Mark  says, 
"He  began  to  be  sore  amazed,  and  to  be  very  heavy,  and  saith 
unto  them — My  soul  is  exceeding  sorrowful  unto  death  ;  tarry  ye 
here  and  watoh."  Matthew  records  most  fully  the  words  of  his 
prayer: — "  He  fell  on  his  face  and  prayed,  saying,  O  my  Father, 
if  it  be  possible,  let  this  cup  pass  from  me ;  nevertheless,  not  as  1 

will  but  as  thou  wilt." Returning  to  the  disciples  and  finding 

them  asleep  (alas,  for  human  infirmity — not  to  say  also  for  de- 
ficient sympathy  !) — he  saith  to  Peter,  as  if  to  remind  him  of 
professions  of  love,  scarcely  yet  cold  upon  his  lips  : — "  What ! 
could  ye  not  watch  with  me  one  hour  ?  " But  mark  the  tender- 
ness of  his  own  apology:   "The  spirit  indeed  is  willing,  but  the 

flesh  is  weak." Still  there  comes  no  relief  from  the  dreadful 

burden,  and  again  he  withdraws  from  tliem  (Luke  says  "  about  a 
stone's  cast"),  and  pours  out  his  soul  in  prayer:  "O  my  Father, 
if  this  cup  may  not  pass  from  me  except  I  drink  it,  thy  will  be 
done."  Returning  to  the  chosen  three  once  more,  he  finds  them 
asleep  again. — Ah,  the  pain  of  such  neglect! — the  fearfully  sug- 
gestive power  of  its  intimation  that  even  his  redeemed  people  will 
not  (always)  stand  by  him  in  his  most  bitter  need. 

In  the  general  outline  of  this  scene,  Matthew  and  Mark  are  al- 
together at  one — the  points  made  by  each  being  substantially  the 
same ;  the  differences  being  little  else  than  verbal.  Luke  adds 
12 


2G2  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVIII.— GETHSEMANE. 

two  or  three  incidents ;  e.  g.  that  "  there  appeared  unto  him  an 
angel  from  heaven,  strengthening  him:  "  and  that  "being  in  an 
agony,  he  prayed  more  earnestly,  and  his  sweat  was,  as  it  were, 
great  drops  of  blood  falling  down  to  the  ground."  What  messa- 
ges of  love  and  sympathy  this  ministering  angel  brought  from 
heaven,  are  not  on  record  (we  may  wish  they  were) — but  it  is  a 
comfort  to  think  that  when  all  human  sympathy  failed  him  so  de- 
plorably, angelic  sympathy  came  to  his  relief As  to  the  sweat, 

said  to  have  been  "  as  great  drops  of  blood,"  the  prevalent  opin- 
ions of  critics  Concur  in  this  sense:  great  drops  of  sweat  colored 
with  blood — not  in  appearance  only,  but  in  fact  a  bloody  sweat.  ' 
It  is  highly  improbable  that  a  profuse  sweat  would  be  compared 
with  great  clots  of  blood,  if  the  only  point  of  comparison  was  the 
size  of  the  drops  and  the  sweat  were  really  bloodless.  That  such 
bloody  sweat  is  physiologically  possible  under  intense  agony, 
seems  to  be  a  well  authenticated  fact,  though  the  cases  are  exceed- 
ingly rare. 

In  speaking  of  the  sleep  of  the  disciples,  Luke  puts  it — "sleep- 
ing for  sorrow."  This  result  of  sorrow  is  scarcely  supposable 
save  in  the  case  where  great  sorrow  has  served  to  exhaust  human 
endurance — which  would  bring  the  fact  as  an  apology  under  the 
other  statement — "  The  flesh  is  weak."  Eeally  this  is  the  only 
apologetic  plea  which  this  case  admits.  The  preceding  day  and 
evening  had  been  one  of  intense  excitement — of  exhausting  in- 
terest and  thought. 

The  inspired  accounts  of  the  scenes  inCethseniane  are  rounded 
out  by  the  writer  to  the  Heln-ews  (5  :  7,  8) ;  who  says  of  Jesus — 
"  In  the  days  of  his  flesh  when  he  had  oflered  up  prayers  and 
supplications  Avith  strong  crying  and  tears  to  him  that  was  able 
to  save  him  fi-om  death,  and  was  heard  in  that  he  feared: — 
Though  he  were  a  Son,  yet   learned  he  obedience  by  the  things 

Avhich  he  sufiered." This  passage,  being  a  sort  of  comment  by 

an  inspired  apostle  upon  the  scenes  of  Gethsemane,  should  have 
weight  in  the  interpretation  of  those  scenes.  It  recognizes  the 
fact  of  most  earnest  prayer;  that  this  prayer  was  oflered  as  to 
"  one  who  was  able  to  save  him  from  death  ;  "  and  that  in  some  im- 
portant sense  the  prayer  was  heard  and  answered.  In  what 
sense  is  one  of  the  chief  questions  in  interpreting  the  words  and 

scenes  of  Gethsemane. The  clause  translated — "  was  heard  in 

that  he  feared" — is  not  only  obscure  in  the  English  but  some- 
what doubtful  in  the  Greek.* The  choice  lies  between  these 

two  constructions:  (a.)  "Being  heard  [and  delivered]  from  the 
thing  he  feared;  "  and  (6.)  Being  heard  fromf  [because  of]  the 
piety,  i.  e.  of  his  prayer — because  of  his  profound  submission  to 
the  Father's  will.  The  former  construction  assumes  it  a  case  of 
"  constructio  pregnans  " — i.  e.  one  which  involves  the  idea  of 
another  verb.     It  also  takes  the  noun   translated  "  fear"  J  in  a 

''^  eiacKovcdEia  atro  Tija  Ev?.a[ieLaa.  '\  aTzo.  J  f  f/'apf/aa. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVIIL— GETIISEMANE.      263 

sense  unknown  to  the  New  Testament — its  only  N.  T.  sense  be- 
ing r/ocZ/yycrtr — true  piety;  and  never  the  dread  of  some  danger. 

The  hitter  construction  takes  the  preposition  *  in  an  unusual 

yet  not  inadmissible  sense,  and  seems  to  require  the  word  for  his 
instead  of  the  article — because  of  Ms  piety.  Hence  there  are 
somewhat  grave  difficulties  in  cither  construction  ; — less,  however, 
(grammatically  and  lexicographically)  in  the  latter  than  in  the 
former. But  without  deciding  absolutely  between  these  con- 
structions, let  it  suffice  to  say  that  both  concur  in  this  point — 
that  the  prayer  of  Jesus  in  Gethsemane  was  in  some  important 
sense  answered. 

Is  it  permitted  us  to  approach  this  scene  of  agony  and  inquire 
reverently — What  were  tlie  elements  of  its  great  sorrow  ? 

In  the  first  place  it  must  be  carefully  considered  that  the  hu- 
man rather  than  the  divine  in  the  person  of  Christ  is  prominent 
here.  It  is  not  given  us  to  know  perfectly  how  it  could  be  that 
the  human  should  bear  such  relations  to  the  divine  as  to  suffer 
not  only  pains  of  body  but  pains  of  soul  according  to  the  normal 
laws  of  human  suffering,  as  if  the  divine  nature  and  powers  were 
for  the  time,  to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  in  abeyance ;  but  such 
seems  to  be  the  fact.  As  we  have  more  than  once  had  occasion 
to  suggest  in  reference  to  the  prayers  offered  by  Jesus — prayer  is 
liuman ;  and  hence  the  prayers  of  Jesus  must  assume  that  the 
human  in  his  compound  nature  is  in  the  foreground.  He  prays 
as  man — not  as  God.  These  scenes  in  Gethsemane  were  full  of 
prayer — were  certainly  as  human  as  prayer  is  human.  So  far  as 
we  can  comprehend  them,  the  sufferings  that  evoked  those 
prayers  were  those  of  his  human  soul. 

Reasoning  therefore  upon  these  assumptions,  we  take  into  con- 
sideration all  the  known  circumstances  of  the  case,  and  there- 
upon suggest — 

(«.)  This  was  the  hour  of  supreme,  intense,  undiverted  antici- 
pation. Other  interests  than  his  own  personal  suffering  had  re- 
ceived their  due  attention.  Earnest  thought  had  been  devoted 
long  to  the  case  of  his  disciples,  lie  had  given  large  scope  to 
his  solicitudes,  sympathies,  counsels,  and  prayers  for  them — as  we 
have  seen  all  through  the  previous  hours  of  this  memorable  eve- 
ning. Now  his  own  great  "  hour  "  draws  nigh,  and  all  the  momen- 
tous scenes  of  his  final  sufferings  rush  upon  his  soul.  We  know 
how  terribly  the  anticipation  of  suffering  bears  upon  human 
nerves.  Upon  some  temperaments  and  in  certain  respects  it  has 
less  alleviations  and  seems  more  unendurable  than  the  very  suf- 
fering Avhich  is  foreseen. 

{h.)  We  must  allow  some  place  to  the  suggestive  power  of  the 
circumstances  immediately  present; — e.  g.  that  one  of  the  chosen 
twelve  is  the  traitor,  reminding  him  how  often  he  must  be  wounded 
in  the  house  of  his  friends ;  that  the  three  of  his  remaining 
eleven — most  loved  and  most  relied    on,  are  sleeping  instead  of 


264     GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  XVIII.— GETHSEMANE. 

sympathizing,  praying,  watching;  can  not  be  induced  either  to 
pray  or  to  watch  with  him,  nor  even  to  watch  and  pray  for  them- 
selves in  this  hour  of  so  much  peril. — Moreover,  he  knew  they 
would  all  within  a  few  moments  forsake  him  and  flee ;  that  the 
most  earnest,  enthusiastic,  and  outspoken  of  them  all  would  deny 
him  with  oaths  and  curses.  Alas !  how  bitter  must  these  facts 
have  been,  considered  not  merely  in  themselves  alone  but  in  their 
suggestive  power  as  indicating  how  unspeakably  his  soul  must  be 
tried  all  along  the  ages  of  the  future  by  the  infirmities  and  the  sins 
of  his  professed  disciples ! 

(c.)  More  yet  must  be  ascribed  to  the  assaults  of  Satan  and  his 
legions.  To  such  assaults  Jesus  seems  to  allude  in  the  words 
(Luke  22:  53):  "But  this  is  j'our  hour  and  tlie  power  of  darlc- 
ness."  Also  in  these  (John  14:  30):  "For  the  Prince  of  this 
world  Cometh,"  etc.  We  may  therefore  assume  that  these  were 
moments  of  fierce  and  fearful  conflicts  with  Satan.  It  is  but  lit- 
tle that  we  can  know,  from  the  testimony  of  other  human  expe- 
rience, of  the  foul  suggestions,  the  hot  temptations,  of  Satan;  of 
the  rapid  succession  of  his  thrusts,  and  the  fierceness  of  his  as- 
saults ;  but  we  may  safely  say — he  did  his  worst.  He  shrunk 
from  nothing  as  too  mean,  too  dastardly,  too  blasphemous,  too 
horribly  malign — which  might  (in  his  hope)  break  down  the  sub- 
lime purpose  of  the  Holy  Sufferer ;  or,  failing  of  this,  might  in- 
flict torture,  harass  with  doubt,  or  enshroud  with  darkness  and 
gloom.  All  and  more  than  all  (probably)  that  his  children  have 
ever  suffered  from  Satan,  or  ever  will,  went  into  his  cup  in  that 
dreadful  hour — to  the  end  that  "  having  suffered,  being  tempted, 
he  might  the  better  succor  those  who  are  tempted." 

{d.)  To  all  this  may  we  not  add  a  certain  fearful  apprehension 
that  he  might  fail  under  the  dreadful  burdens  to  be  borne. 
Would  his  fortitude  and  patience  be  equal  to  the  strain ;  would 
his  soul  abide  true  to  its  purpose  through  the  entire  long  period 
of  this  anticipated  horror  and  agony  ?  It  is  at  least  supposable 
that  Satan's  temptations  were  plied  on  this  point  especially,  and 
that  a  sense  of  human  weakness  heightened  the  agonizing  appre- 
hensions of  this  fearful  hour.  May  not  this  have  been  a  large 
element  in  the  pains  grouped  under  the  Avord  '^cvp"  which  he 
prayed  so  fervently  might  j^ass  from  him — the  fear  of  some  moral 
failure  under  his  awful  sufferings  of  body  and  soul  upon  the 
cross? — It  should  be  considered  that  "cup  '  does  not  define  the 
nature  of  the  sufferings  which  fill  it.  We  need  not  suppose  it  to 
denote  mainly  his  death  itself  by  crucifixion.  There  are  grave 
objections  to  the  supposition  that  he  prayed  to  be  excused  from 
this  death.  Far  more  probable  is  it  that  he  prayed  against  pos- 
sible failure — that  this  was  the  fear  which  so  agonized  him  in  the 
srarden,  and  that  in  this  definite  respect — from  this  dread  appre- 
hension— he  was  delivered  in  answer  to  his  prayer.  It  is  en- 
tirely clear  that  the  agitation  and  horror  which  were  so  promi- 
nent" in  the  garden  passed  away  and  left  his  soul  calm  and  self- 
possessed.     Never  was  moral  heroism  more  calm  than  his  when 


GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVIII.  — GETIISEMANE.     2G5 

Judas  and  his  posse  broke  upon  the  stilhicss  of  Gcthsemanc  and 
they  led  him  away  to  the  insults  and  injustice  of  their  tribunals. 

(<?.)  Coupled  Avith  all  the  rest,  we  must  assume  a  very  extreme 
physical  nervous  prostration — a  state  of  exhaustion  which  may 
have  almost  robbed  him  of  the  power  of  endurance,  lie  may 
have  spoken  from  experience — even  present  experience — Avhcn 
he  said  for  his  disciples — "The  flesh  is  weak."  When  we  review 
the  scenes  of  the  previous  day  and  eveninii;;  think  of  the  mental 
tension,  the  draft  upon  his  sympathies,  the  burden  of  such  and 
so  much  responsibility;  of  the  words  he  spake  and  the  prayer  he 
oll'cred,  coupled  also  with  the  wear  of  that  flood  of  anticipations 
then  rushing  upon  his  soul,  we  shall  h.ave  some  data  from  which 
to  estimate  the  nervous  exhaustion  of  the  Man  of  sorrows  at  this 
hour.  That  he  became  physically  unable  to  carry  the  wood  of 
his  cross  alone,  and  that  under  the  agonies  of  crucifixion  life  be- 
came extinct  long  before  Pilate  supposed  it  possible  he  could  have 
died,  are  collateral  circumstances  confirming  this  view  of  his 
phj-sical  exhaustion. 

{/,)  The  point  last  to  be  named — of  Avhich  we  know  least — can 
be  only  suggested — -viz.  that  there  may  have  been  in  some  degree 
a  hiding  of  the  Father's  face— a  measure  of  the  same  experience 
which  at  the  sixth  hour  of  his  passion  extorted  that  most  bitter 
wail  Avhich  ever  fell  from  human  lips  : — "  My  God,  my  God,  why 
hast  thou  forsaken  me?" — We  could  scarcely  make  a  greater 
mistake  than  to  estimate  on  the  scale  of  our  own  experience  the 
darkness  and  horror  of  his  holy  soul  under  such  conscious  sus- 
pension of  the  Father's  manifested  fovor.  For,  be  it  considered, 
none  of  us  have  ever  stood — none  will  ever  stand — in  the  place 
of  lost  sinners  before  God,  to  "bear  their  sins"  in  the  way  of  an 
atoning  sacrifice.  God  has  never  hidden  his  face  from  us — has 
never  "  forsaken"  us — while  Ave  were  faithfully  true  to  our  love 

and  service  for  him — and  never  will And  not  least — let  it  be 

considered  that — to  Jesus,  who  had  never  knoAvn  such  darkness 
Godicard  before — who  had  enjoyed  the  perfect  bliss  of  the  Father's 
light  and  love  with  never  an  intermission  till  then — this  experi- 
ence must  have  been  inexpressibly  agonizing,  appalling.  This 
may  be  the  very  thing  suggested  if  not  expressed  in  the  Avord  used 
by  Mark  (14  :  33) — "began  to  be  sore  amazed"  * — a-  Avord  Avhich 
expresses  both  surprise  and  horror — as  if  some  new  experience 
Avas  upon  him — appalling  and  cA^en  astounding. 

These  are  suggested  as  being  (supposably)  the  elements  of  the 
great  agony  of  Jesus  in  Gethsemane. 

The  reader  will  not  make  the  mistake  of  supposing  that  these 
points  are  put  here  as  actual  knowledge.  No  such  claim  is  made. 
It  is  not  given  us  yet  to  knoAV  Avith  absolute  certainty  what  were 
the  elements  of  that  cup  of  AA'oe.  Of  the  surrounding  circum- 
Btiinces  Ave  do  knoAv  something;  Avith  the  laAvs  of  our  OAvn  human 
nature  we  may  become  in  a  measure  familiar ;  of  the  Avords  that 

••■  eKOa/iiSeo/mr. 


2G6      GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  XVIII.— GETHSEMANE. 

fell  from  the  lips  of  the  Sufferer  we  have  probably  a  someAvliat 
full  and  certainly  an  authentic  record.  It  has  been  niy  aim  to 
form  opinions  and  make  suggestions  based  upon  these  data,  con- 
fident that  it  must  be  morally  Avholesome  to  study  the  entire 
scene  reverently,  solemnly,  tenderly— with  our  souls  keenly  alive 
to  sympathy  with  him  we  love,  and  open  to  the  full  impression 
of  what  it  was  for  him  to  "  bear  our  griefs  and  carry  our  sorrows, 
that  by  his  stripes  we  might  be  healed." 

If  the  question  be  asked,  Why  did  not  John  give  some  account 
of  these  scenes  in  Gethsemane  ?  we  can  answer  only  by  conjec- 
ture. We  may  be  quite  sure  this  omission  was  not  due  to  any 
want  of  sympathy  and  interest  in  those  scenes.  We  may  remem- 
ber that  he  (and  he  onlj^)  records  that  other  very  similar  though 
briefer  and  less  agonizing  scene  (viz.  in  32:  27-30).  His  own 
personal  recollections  of  the  real  Gethsemane  could  not  have 
faded  out,  for  he  was  one  of  the  three,  chosen  by  Jesus  to  be  near- 
est him  in  that  dark  hour.  No  apparent  reason  for  his  omitting 
all  record  of  this  scene  is  more  probable  than  this — that  he  knew 
it  had  been  very  fully  described  in  three  other  gospel  histories. 
He  may  therefore  have  felt  that  he  had  nothing  to  add  to  Avhat 
had  been  fully  and  well  said  by  others. To  this  we  may  per- 
haps subjoin  suggestively  that  those  scenes  did  not  seem  to  bear 
very  directly  ujion  the  special  object  for  which  he  compiled  his 
history — "  That  ye  may  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son 
of  God."  Gethsemane  revealed  the  linman  in  Jesus  rather  than 
the  divine. 

2.  And  Judas  also,  Avliich  betrayed  him,  knew  the  place : 
for  Jesus  ofttiuies  resorted  thither  with  his  disciples. 

Judas  knew  the  place;  he  had  been  there  often  with  his  jMaster 
and  the  chosen  disciples.  He  had  reason  to  expect  that  after  the 
labors  and  responsibilities  of  such  a  day  in  the  temjjle  among  the 
gathered  thousands,  and  after  the  scenes  at  the  supper,  Jesus 
would  retire  to  this  place  of  prayer  for  his  accustomed  commun- 
ion with  his  Father.— But  what  a  revelation  is  made  here  of  the 

character  of  Judas  !  His  definite  plan  is  to  break  in  upon  Jesus 
while  engaged  in  his  private  devotions  and  in  the  very  place 
sacred  to  communion  with  God  !  Judas  had  been  there  scores  of 
times,  a  witness  to  the  devotions  of  his  Master,  but  never  in  de- 
vout sympathy ;  never  to  pray  himself.  No  hallowed  associations 
with  that  sacred  spot  deterred  his  treason  for  one  moment.  It  Avas 
a  good  time  to  find  his  victim  apart  from  the  multitude,  alone  with 
his  God; — what  more  should  he  care  for?  Why  should  any 
qualms  of  conscience,  or  any  notions  as  to  the  sacredness  of  com- 
munion with  God  hold  him  back  from — the  chance  of  making 
money  by  selling  his  knowledge  of  this  secret  place  of  prayer  ? 

3.  Judas  then,  having  received  a  band  of  men  and  officers 
from  the  chief  priests  and  Pharisees,  cometh  thither  Avith 
lanterns  and  torches  and  Aveapons. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP,  xviii.  267 

4.  Jesus  therefore,  knowing  all  things  that  shoultl  come 
upon  him,  •\vent  forth,  and  said  unto  them.  Whom  seek  ye  ? 

5.  They  answered  him,  Jesus  of  Nazareth.  Jesus  saith 
unto  tliem,  I  am  he.  And  Judas  also,  which  betrayed  him, 
stood  Avith  them. 

6.  As  soon  then  as  lie  had  said  unto  tliem,  I  am  Jie,  they 
went  backward,  and  fell  to  the  ground. 

This  "band"  may  possibly  have  been  Roman  soldiers,  but 
probably  were  a  detachment  from  the  Levite  guards  of  the  tem- 
ple. Tlic  word*  is  used  of  either.  In  the  present  case  it  was  a 
rudely  armed  troop — "  swords  and  staves,"  or  bludgeons — not  the 
weapons  of  the  IJoman  soldier ;  besides  that  a  Koman  band 
would  naturally  take  their  prisoner  at  once  before  a  lioman  tribu- 
nal.    The   officers  of  the   chief  priests   and  Pharisees  were   of 

course  Jews. "Armed  with  lanterns  and  torches,"  as  well  as 

death  weapons,  because  it  was   night  and  vital  to  their  success 

that  they  should  recognize   their  man. Jesus,  fully  aware   of 

their  purpose,  with  no  thought  of  either  resistance  or  escape, 
"  went  forth,"  i.  e.  from  the  secluded  retreat  where  his  great 
agony  of  praj^er  had  transpired,  and  surrendered  himself  to  their 
hands.  The  other  three  evangelists  concur  in  saying  that  Judas 
was  to  designate  the  man  by  the  concerted  signal  of  a  kiss — and 
did  so — professing  the  truest  friendship  to  carry  out  the  foulest 

treason  !     What  could  be  more  mean  and  vile  ? John  only  of 

the  four  evangelists  records  that  at  the  Avoi-ds  of  Jesus — "1  am 
he,"  this  .armed  posse  "went  backward  and  fell  to  the  ground." 
Strange  that  this  did  not  open  the  eyes  of  Judas  and  appall  his 
soul  with  terror  !  Strange  that  his  heart  was  not  smitten  with  a 
sense  of  the  dignity  and  majesty  of  the  innocent  man  he  was  be- 
traying !  Strange  that  the  priests  and  Pharisees  present  in  that 
"  band  "  did  not  think  of  fifty  men  sent  twice  to  bring  Elijah 
down  from  his  mountain  retreat,  and  ask  themselves,  What  are 
we  doing  ?  Who  is  this  man  of  Galilee  that  we  can  not  stand  be- 
fore him? Whether  this  "band"  were  made  up  of  volunteers, 

or  of  picked  men,  we  must  suppose  them  men  of  average  firmness 
— not  of  the  sort  whose  manhood  is  sapped  by  a  weak  superstition 
— that  they  should  be  smitten  with  causeless  panic.  But  they 
were  sent  on  a  cruel,  unrighteous  mission,  and  it  may  have  been 
divinely  ordered  to  give  them  one  admonition  (perhaps  but  this 
one)  that  their  bloody  purpose  brought  them  into  collision  with 
the  Infinite  and  righteous  God. 

7.  Then  asked  he  them  again,  AVhom  seek  ye?  And  they 
said,  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

8.  Jesus  answered,  I  have  told  you  that  I  am  he:  if  there- 
fore ye  seek  me,  let  these  go  their  way : 

*  arreipa. 


268  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— ciiAr.  xviii. 

9.  That  the  saying  might  be  fulfilled,  which  he  spake,  Of 
them  which  thou  gayest  me  have  I  lost  none. 

When  they  rose  to  their  feet  Jesus  mildly  repeated  his  ques- 
tion, "  Whom  seek  ye  ?  "  and  renewed  his  surrender  of  himself, 

asking  only  the  favor  that  his  disciples  might  go  unmolested. 

The  "saying  which  he  spake"  is  supposed  to  he  that  in  John  17: 
12.  The  divine  plan  called  for  his  life  to  he  sacrificed,  hut 
equally,  that  the  lives  of  his  disciples  should  he  spared,  for  the 
work  yet  before  them. 

10.  Then  Simon  Peter  having  a  sword  drew  it,  and  smote 
the  high  priest's  servant,  and  cut  oft'  his  right  car.  The 
servant's  name  Avas  Malchus. 

11.  Then  said  Jesus  nnto  Peter,  Put  np  thy  sword  into 
the  sheath :  the  cup  which  my  Father  hath  given  me,  shall 
I  not  drink  it? 

True  to  his  own  instincts  and  characteristics,  Peter  is  for  fight, 
with  deadly  weapons,  and  to   the  death — for,  judging  from   the 

aim  of  this  hlow,  he  intended  it  to  he  more  serious  than  it  was. 

Did  this  quick  resort  to  his  sword  come  of  his  still  cherished  no- 
tions of  a  temporal  kingdom,  to  he  founded  in  force  and  sustained 
by  arms  ?  Whether  so  or  not,  it  is  plain  that  his  Master's  rebuke 
staggered,  not  to  say  stunned  him,  and  that  his  soul  gravitated 
suddenly  from  the  extreme  of  rash  boldness  to  pusillanimous 
timidity;  that  non-resistance. did  not  come  easy  to  him;  and  fur- 
thermore, that  he  became  fearful  that  he  had  exposed  himself  to 
vengeance  and  had  every  thing  to  fear  from  being  known  as  one 

of  the  disciples  of  Jesus.     So  one  mis-step  begat  more. This 

servant's  name,  omitted  by  each  of  the  other  evangelists,  appears 
in  John.  The  omission  at  the  early  date  of  the  first  three  may 
have  been  prudent ;  the  insertion  at  the  late  date  of  John's  gospel 
was  doubtless  safe  enough,  and  served  to  give  an  air  of  life-like- 
ness to  his   history. All  the  gospel  historians   speak  of  this 

sword-blow  of  Peter,  as  falling  upon  a  servant  of  the  high  priest 
and  cutting  off  his  right  car.  Luke  only  has  told  us  that  Jesus 
said — "Suffer  ye  thus   far;"    then  touched  his  ear  and  healed 

him. How  Jesus  expostulated  with  Peter  is  given  most  fully 

by  Matthew  (26:  52-54):  "Put  up  again  thy  sword  into  his 
place;  for  all  they  that  take  the  sword  shall  perish  with  the 
sword.  Thinkest  thou  that  I  can  not  now  Jiray  to  my  Father 
and  he  shall  presently  give  me  more  than  twelve  legions  of  an- 
gels ?  But  how  then  shall  the  Scriptures  be  fulfilled,  that  thus  it 
must  be  ?" 

12.  Then  the  band  and  the  captain  and  officers  of  the 
Jews  took  Jesus,  and  bound  him, 

13.  And  led  him  away  to  Annas  lir.st;  for  he  was  father 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAR  XVIII.  2G9 

in-];i\v  to  Caiaphas,  -wliich  was  the  high  priest  that  same 
year. 

14.  Now  Caiaplias  was  he,  which  gave  counsel  to  the  Jews, 
that  it  Avas  expedient  that  one  man  should  die  for  the  people. 

In  giving;  the  details  of  this  trial,  John  only  has  spoken  of 
the  preliminary  examination  as  being  before  Annas.  The  point 
of  transition  from  Annas  to  Caiaphas  as  presiding  officer,  if  in- 
deed it  was  made  distinctly  in  fact,  is  not  clearly  put  in  the 
inspired  histories.  IMatthew  seems  to  say  that  Jesus  was  taken 
at  once  and  at  first  before  Caiaphas  ;  next  and  hist,  before  Pilate. 
Mark  omits  the  name  of  the  Jewish  presiding  officer,  simply  calling 
him  "  the  High  Priest."  Luke  also  omits  names;  passes  over  the 
night  session  with  no  details  of  the  examination  ;  but  notices  dis- 
tinctly the  early  morning  session  of  the  whole  Sanhedrim. 
AVhether  the  scenes  recorded  by  John  (vs.  19-24)  were  before  An- 
nas or  before  Caiaphas,  or  before  both  sitting  on  the  same  bench, 
seems  to  be  left  in  doubt.     If  before  Annas  onl)^,  then  John  omits 

what  transpired  before  Caiaphas  during  the  night  session. This 

partition  of  responsibility  between  Annas  and  Caiaphas  is  of  no 

special  importance. John  is  careful  to  identify  Annas  as  the 

same  who  had  previously  advised  the  murder  of  Jesus  (11  :  49,  50). 

Judas  has  done  his  part  and  got  his  money.     Shall  we  follow 

him  a  moment  to  his  end? John  di'ops  his  story  here.     From 

others  we  learn  that  when  he  saw  Jesus  condemned  "  he  repented 
himself"  (not  the  word  used  for  gospel  repentance);  brought 
again  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver  to  the  priests  and  elders  (which 
after  the  manner  of  ill-gotten  gain  was  "  eating  his  flesh  as  it  had 
been  fire,"  James  5  :  3)  saying — "  I  have  sinned  in  that  I  have 
])etrayed  the  innocent  blood."  To  which,  with  the  coldest  sort 
of  comfort,  they  replied — "What  is  that  to  us?  See  thou  to 
that."     All  they  cared  for  was  their  victim.     What  if  he  were 

innocent  ?     They  knew  that  before. If  you  have  done  a  wicked 

thinir,  that  is  your  concern,  not  ours!  Alas!  Judas  scarcely 
needed  any  one  to  tell  him  it  was  his  concern.     He  not  only  knew 

this  but  felt  it. This  accursed  money; — his  hand  could  hold  it 

no  longer;  he  thrust  it  down  upon  the  pavement  of  the  temple; 
rushed  away  ;  sought  some  elevated  point  and  hung  himself; — to 
which  Luke  adds  (Acts  1:  18)  that,  "falling  headlong,  he  burst 
asunder  in  the  midst,  and  all  his  bowels  gushed  out." — A  yet 
briefer  record  testifier  what  became  of  his  immortal  part: — "Ju- 
das by  transgression  fell  that  he  might  .(70  to  his  own  j) lace." 

The  record  in  whole  supplies  two  gi-eat  moral  lessons  :  one  upon 
the  innocence  of  Jesus ;  the  other  upon  the  wages  of  sin. 

15.  And  Simon  Peter  followed  Jesus,  and  so  did  another 
disciple :  that  disciple  was  known  unto  the  high  priest,  and 
went  in  Avitli  Jesus  into  the  palace  of  the  high  priest. 

IG.  But  Peter  stood  at  the  door  without.     Then  went  out 


270  GOSPEL   OF   JOHN.— CHAP.  XVIII. 

that  other  disciple,  whicli  was  known  unto  the  high  priest, 
and  spake  unto  her  that  kept  the  door,  and  brought  in  Peter. 

17.  Then  saith  the  damsel  that  kept  the  door  unto  Peter, 
Art  not  thou  also  one  of  this  man's  disciples?  He  saith,  I 
am  not. 

18.  And  the  servants  and  officers  stood  there,  who  had 
made  a  fire  of  coals,  for  it  was  cold  ;  and  they  warmed  them- 
selves :  and  Peter  stood  with  them,  and  warmed  himself. 

These  are  the  first  erring  steps  of  Peter.  He  followed  Jesus — 
but  "afar  off" — to  see  what  might  befall  him.  So  did  another 
disciple  whom  the  writer  forbears  to  name.  We  may  call  him — 
the  writer  himself — this  being  his  way  of  speaking  of  himself. 
It  happened  that  John  was  known  to  the  high  priest,  and  so  was 
permitted  to  enter  the  court-room.  Peter  not  being  recognized 
and  fearing  what  might  happen  to  himself,  stopped  outside  the 
door  till  John  brought  him  in.  It  seems  to  have  been  a  casual 
remark  of  the  door-maid,  having  no  purposed  bearing  upon  Pe- 
ter's safety — "Art  thou  not  also'  (as  Avell  as  John)  "one  of  this 
man's  disciples?"  To  which  he  replied — "I  am  not."  Our  au- 
thor locates  this  as  his  first  denial  of  his  Lord. Peter  did  not 

think  it  prudent  to  leave  abruptly  :  it  might  excite  more  suspicion  ; 
and  moreover  he  had  not  yet  seen  the  end  ;.  so  he  throws  himself 
among  the  servants  around  the  fire — apparently  as  if  one  of  them, 
while  the  trial  of  his  Lord  went  on. 

19.  The  high  priest  then  asked  Jesus  of  his  disciples,  and 
of  his  doctrine. 

20.  Jesus  answered  him,  I  spake  openly  to  the  world ;  I 
ever  taught  in  the  synagogue,  and  in  the  temple,  whither 
the  Jews  always  resort ;  and  in  secret  have  I  said  nothing. 

21.  Why  askest  thou  me?  ask  them  which  heard  me, 
what  I  have  said  unto  them  :  behold,  they  know  what  I 
said. 

22.  And  when  he  had  thus  spoken,  one  of  the  officers 
which  stood  by  struck  Jesus  with  the  palm  of  his  hand,  say- 
ing, Answerest  thou  the  high  priest  so? 

23.  Jesus  answered  him.  If  I  have  spoken  evil,  bear  wit- 
ness of  the  evil :  but  if  well,  why  smitest  thou  me  ? 

24.  Now  Annas  had  sent  him  bound  unto  Caiaphas  the 
high  priest. 

From  this  account  of  the  proceedings  before  the  high  priest,  it 
is  clear  that  the  court  was  itself  the  accusing  party ;  that  the 
judge  had  no  definite  charge  to  make,  but  was  laboring  to  find 
one.  The  question  what  it  shoitkl  be  was  an  after  consideration; 
the  question  whether  it  were  just  or  not — was  no  consideration 
at  all.         So  they  began  with  leading  questions  : — Whij  have  you 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CILVr.  XVIII.  271 

been  gatlicrin^  disciples  ?     And  wliat  have  you  taught  them  ? 

With  profoundest  sagacity  Jesus  replied  : — I  have  taught  in  pub- 
lic only — in  your  own  synagogues  and  in  your  temple.  Ask  the 
people  what  I  have  taught;  they  know:  "In  secret  have  I  said 
nothing."  I\Iy  gospel  is  for  all  the  Avorld;  I  teach  nothing  which 
I  fear  to  have  all  the  world  and  this  court  itself  know  perfectly. 
Matthew  and  ]\[ark  relate  more  fully  the  history  of  this  ex- 
amination, showing  how  earnestly  and  long  they  sought  fiilse  wit- 
ness against  Jesus,  but  found  none ;  how  they  labored  to  convict 
him  of  threatening  to  destroy  their  temple,  but  no  two  witnesses 
concurred  to  the  same  point.  At  length  the  high  priest  adjured 
him — put  him  under  the  sacred  oath — to  answer  whether  he 
were  "  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God."  He  could  not  remain  ret- 
icent; this  solemn  adjuration  before  the  high  court  of  Israel 
made  it  his  duty  to  answer,  and  the  point  itself,  it  had  been  the 
gi'eat  aim  and  labor  of  his  public  ministry  to  affirm  and  set  forth. 
He  therefore  solemnly  reaffirmed  it  here — "/  am."  To  admonish 
them  once  more  of  their  infinite  peril,  he  subjoins — "  Hereafter 
je  shall  see  the  Son  of  man  sitting  on  the  right  hand  of  power 
and  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven." The  High  Priest  ex- 
pressed his  horror;  declared  it  blasphemy  ;  and  called  for  the  de- 
cision of  the  council.     They  all  said,  "Ho  is  guilty  of  death." 

Thus  before  the  highest  Jewish  tribunal,'  Jesus  stands  convicted 
of  blasphemy  and  is  therefore  adjudged  worthy  to  die.  But  the 
power  to  take  life  judicially  had  passed  from  their  hands  to  the 
liomans.     Hence  they  must  needs  take  the  case  before  Pilate. 

25.  And  Simon  Peter  stood  and  Avai-med  himself.  They 
said  therefore  unto  him,  Art  not  thou  also  one  of  his  dis- 
ciples?    He  denied  it,  and  said,  I  am  not. 

26.  One  of  the  servants  of  tlie  liigh  priest,  being  his 
kinsman  wliose  ear  Peter  cut  off,  saith,  Did  not  I  see  thee 
in  tlie  garden  with  him? 

27.  Peter  then  denied  again  ;  and  immediately  the  cock 
crew. 

These  verses  conclude  John's  record  of  Peter's  fall.  The  sec- 
ond denial  was  in  reply  to  a  question  put  to  him  by  those  Avho 
stood  Avitli  him  around  the  fire;  the  thu-d,  to  a  question  by  a  kins- 
man of  that  servant  of  the  high  priest  whose  ear  Peter  had  cut 
off.  This  latter  question  would  naturally  suggest  to  Peter  the 
thought  of  jiersonal  danger,  and  so  become  a  special  temptation  to 
deny  his  Lord. Close  upon  this  third  denial  the  cock  crew. 

Supplementing  this  record  from  the  other  evangelists,  we  learn 
that  the  more  definite  form  of  Christ's  prediction  was — "Before 
the  cock  crow  twice,  thou  wilt  deny  me  thrice;"  that  there  was 
a  first  and  second  crowing  of  the  cock — the  first  apparently  un- 
noticed by  Peter;  but  that  the  second  suggested  to  him  this 
solemn  forewarning  from  his  Master;  that  Peter  "denied  with  an 
oath,"  or  as  reported  by  Matthew  and  by  Mark — "began  to  curse 


272  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVIII. 

and  to  swear,  saying,  I  know  not  this  man  of  whom  ye  speak ;"  that 
Peter's  provincial  tongue  betrayed  his  Galilean  origin ;  that  im- 
mediately upon  the  second  cock-crowing,  "  the  Lord  turned  and 
looked  upon  Peter,"  and  that  then  Peter  remembered  those  words 
of  warning;  suddenly  "went  out  and  wept  bitterly,"  or  according 
to  Mark — "When  he  thought  thereon,  he  Avept." It  seems  re- 
markable that  John  should  omit  this  weeping  and  give  no  hint 
of  Peter's  repentance.  !Must  we  not  suppose  that  he  made  up 
this  record  as  supplementary,  so  that  he  might  omit  very  impor- 
tant facts  because  they  were  fully  recorded  already  ? It  de- 
serves notice  that  Mark,  who  is  supposed  to  have  written  under 
the  supervision  of  Peter  himself,  details  the  case  more  fully  than 
any  other  gospel  historian,  and  gives  its  darkest  features.  He 
gives  in  its  full  strength  the  cursing  and  swearing,  but  on  the 
side  of  penitence  says  only  "he  wept;"  while  Matthew  and  Luke 
have  it— -"Avept  bitterl3^"  Staunch  honesty,  real  contrition  and 
humility,  make  his  statement  of  the  offense  very  strong,  but  put 
no  special  emphasis  upon  the  tokens  of  penitent  grief. 

28.  Then  led  they  Jesus  from  Caiaphas  imto  the  hall  of 
judgment :  and  it  was  early  ;  and  they  tliemselves  went  not 
into  the  judgment  hall,  lest  they  should  be  defiled ;  but  that 
they  might  eat  the  passover. 

This  "hall  of  judgment"  was  the  Roman  tribunal,  Pilate  being 
at  this  time  the  Iloman  Procurator,  and  consequently  the  judge. 
The  High  Priest  and  his  Council  carry  the  case  before  Pilate, 
not  of  choice  but  of  necessity — as  their  only  means  to  take  his 
life  judicially. Notice  hoAV  sanctimoniousness  and  crime  con- 
sort together  in  the  same  bosoms — the  spirit  of  murder  firing 
their  hearts,  j^et  afraid  to  defile  their  halloAved  garments  or  soil 
their  holy  feet  by  going  into  Pilate's  judgment  hall,  inasmuch  as 
they  were  soon  to  eat  the  holy  Passover !  *  A  ceremonial  religion 
naturally  divorces  itself  from  sound  morality — ceremonies  super- 
seding both  love  to  God  and  love  to  man.  Hence  in  the  case  of 
men  under  the  influence  of  such  religious  notions,  no  amount  of 
depravity  or  crime  ought  to  surprise  us. 

The  words,  "  That  they  might  eat  the  Passover,"  open  -a  ques- 
tion in  regard  to  the  time  when  our  Lord  and  his  disciples  on  the 
one  hand,"and  the  scribes  and  Pharisees  on  the  other,  ate  the 
Passover.  It  seems  clear  that  Jesus  and  his  eleven  had  already 
eaten  their  Paschal   lamb  j — i.  e.  on  the  evening  preceding  this 

"•■•  Jewish  authorities  on  defilement  inform  us  that  going  into  the 
house  of  a  Gentile  made  a  Jew  unclean  for  one  day. 

tThe  testimony  of  Matthew  (26:  17-20);  of  Mark  (14:  12-18); 
and  of  Luke  (22:  7-15),  that  Jesus  and  his  disciples  did  eat  the  real 
Passover  seems  to  he  as  clear  and  strong  as  can  be  framed  in  human 
language.  Thus  Matthew; — "Now  the  first  day  of  the  feast  of  un- 
leavened bread,  the  disciples  came  to  Jesus,  saying,  Where  wilt  thou 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVIII.  273 

hearing  before  Pilate.  How  then  are  we  to  explain  it  that  these 
priests  anticipate  their  Passover  as  yet  future — being  afraid  of 
such  defilement  as  might  preclude  them? 

It  does  not  fall  within  the  plan  of  this  work  to  give  the  his- 
tory of  the  vai-ious  controversies  which  have  arisen  over  points 
of  this  nature.  Let  it  suffice  here  to  say  that  the  solution  most 
satisfactory  to  me  rests  upon  a  distinction  between  the  eating  of 
the  Paschal  lamb  on  the  lirst  evening  of  the  Passover  week,  and 
the  festival  of  the  week  which  opened  fully  on  the  day  following 
and  continued  through  the  seven  days.  This  distinction  being 
recognized  and  applied  in  this  case,  Ave  may  hold,  in  harmony 
with  all  the  statements,  that  our  Lord  and  his  disciples  ate  the 
Paschal  lamb  on  the  evening  preceding  his  arrest ;  that  these 
priests  and  men  of  the  Great  Council,  for  auglit  we  know,  may 
have  had  their  Paschal  lamb  at  the  same  time  (unless  they  neg- 
lected it  to  carry  out  this  scheme  of  arrest)  ;  but  that  they  had 
the  great  festival  yet  in  prospect.  Possibly  they  cared  more  for 
the  festival  than  for  the  Paschal  lamb  itself  with  its  bitter  herbs. 

29.  Pilate  then  went  out  unto  tlieni,  and  said,  What  accu- 
sation'bring  yo  against  this  man? 

30.  They  answered  and  said  unto  him,  If  he  were  not  a 
malefactor,  we  would  not  have  delivered  him  up  unto  thee. 

As  they  must  not  go  in,  Pilate  comes  out  to  them  to  inquire 
of  what  crime  they  accuse  the  prisoner.  It  was  a  hard  question 
for  them  to  answer  the  Roman  Procurator.  Their  council  had 
condemned  him  for  blasphemy;  but  such  blasphemy  was  no  crime 
before  Roman  law.  What  should  they  do?  First,  they  respect- 
fully suggest  that  Pilate  might  take  their  judicial  action  upon 
trust — with  so  much  respect  for  their  justice  and  good  sense  as 
to  believe  that  they  would  not  deliver  a  man  up  to  him  for  the 
sentence  of  death  unless  he  Avere  a  bad  man — a  real  bad-doer. 
If  Pilate  Avould  only  be  so  very  kind  as  to  make  himself  their 
tool  and  order  a  man  to  be  crucified  upon  their  sentence  against 

that  we  prepare  for  thee  to  eat  the  Passover?  "  ..."  I  will  keep 
the  Passover  at  thy  house."     "They  made  ready  Ihe  Passover,  and 

when  even  was  come,  Jesus  sat  down  with   the  twelve." Mark 

gives  his  testimony  with  no  less  strength;  "The  disciples  made 
ready  the  Passover;" — "In  the  evening  he  comefh  Avith  the  tAvelve, 
and  as  they  sat  and  did  eat" — the  exposure  of  Judas  occurred,  etc. 

Luke  is  no  less  positive:  "Then  came  the  day  of  unleavened 

bread  Avhen  the  Passover  must  be  killed;"  "They  made  ready  the 
Passover;"  "When  the  hour  Avas  come  he  sat  down  and  the  twelve 
apostles  Avith  him;  and  he  said— With  desire  have  I  desired  to  eat 

this  Passover  Avith  you  before  I  suffer." Such  testimonies  can  not 

be  overruled  Avithout  impugning  the  historic  vei-acity  of  these  three 
evangelists.  This  is  one  of  the  vital  points  in  the  discussion.  If 
the  witnesses  are  reliable  the  testimony  is  decisive. 


274  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVIIL 

him  as  a  malefactor,  the  case  might  be  disposed  of  without  trouble 
or  delay. 

31.  Then  said  Pilate  unto  them,  Take  ye  him,  and  judge 
him  according  to  your  law.  The  Jews  therefore  said  unto 
him.  It  is  not  lawful  for  us  to  put  any  man  to  death : 

32.  That  the  sa3'ing  of  Jesus  might  be  fulfilled,  which  he 
spake,  signifying  what  death  he  should  die. 

Pilate  does  not  fall  into  this  trap  so  readily  as  they  had  hoped. 
But  he  says — Take  him;  judge  him  by  your  own  law;  and  then 
execute  your  sentence  by  inflicting  such  penalties  as  lie  within 

j^our  powers. Pilate  seems  to  assume  that  the  crime  could  not 

be  one  that  deserved  death,  and  therefore  that  some  penalty  fall- 
ing within  their  authority  would  be  amply  sufficient  for  the  ends 
of  justice. 

They  reply — That  will  by  no  means  answer  our  purpose.  Wc 
must  have  his  life ;  and  it  is  not  lawful  for  us  to  put  any  man  to 

death. Jesus  had  spoken  of  his  death  as  a  being  "  lifted  up  " — 

i.  e.  on  the  cross  (John  12:  32,  and  S:  28,  and  3  :  14)  ;  and  death 
by  crucifixion  implied  an  execution  by  Roman  hands — this  being 
their  method  of  capital  punishment.  The  Jewish  method  (while 
tliey  had  the  power)  was  stoning.  Jesus  foreknew  that  his  death 
must  be  by  Koman  hands.  The  historian  apprises  us  how  the 
course  of  events  was  shaped  to  this  result. 

33.  Then  Pilate  entered  into  the  judgment  hall  again,  and 
called  Jesus,  and  said  unto  him,  Art  thou  the  King  of  the 
Jews  ? 

34.  Jesus  answered  him,  Saj'est  thou  this  thing  of  thyself, 
or  did  others  tell  it  thee  of  me  ? 

John  does  not  show  how  Pilate  was  led  to  put  this  question  to 
Jesus.  Luke  remarks — "  They  began  to  accuse  him,  saying — We 
found  this  fellow  perverting  the  nation  and  forbidding  to  give 
tribute  to  CiBsar,  saying  that  he  himself  is  Christ  a  king  "  (23  ;  2). 
John,  perhaps,  opens  the  case  at  an  earlier  stage,  while  it  yet  re- 
mained doubtful  to  Jesus  how  Pilate  was  induced  to  put  his  main 
question.  Jesus  therefore  calls  for  Pilate's  information  : — "  Did 
this  question  spring  up  in  thy  mind  spontaneously ;  or  did  others 

tell  thee  ?  " Before  Jesus  should  answer  that  question,  it  was 

at  least  prudent  to  ascertain  what  Pilate  meant  by  it;  what  he 
had  heard,  if  any  thing ;  and  what  his  views  of  the  nature  of  the 
charge  might  be. 

It  was  to  the  credit  of  Pilate's  sagacity  and  good  sense  that  the 
clamors  of  the  accusing  Jews  as  given  by  Luke  made  but  little 
impression  on  his  mind.  Very  probaljly  he  saw  that  those 
charges  must  be  false — as  they  were.  The  central  point — that 
Jesus  forbade  tribute-paying  to  Caesar — was  totally  false — the 
very  reverse  of  the  truth  ;  and  sufficed  to  discolor  whatever  else 


GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVIII.  2.  i  O 

in  their  words  as  reported  to  us  had  any  semblance  of  truth — 
e.  g.  that  Jesus  claimed  to  be  a  king.  The  main  charge — that  of 
setting  up  a  worldly  kingdom  in  rebellion  against  tlie  lioman 
power — was  worse  than  groundless,  for  it  imjiuted  to  Jesus  those 
worldly  notions  of  empire — so  rife  among  the  whole  Jewish  peo- 
ple, including  these  very  accusers — which  notions  it  had  been  the 
labor  of  his  life  to  oppose,  and  the  great  sorrow  of  his  life  that 
he  was  able  to  oppose  to  so  little  purpose.  Probably  Pilate  saw 
the  animus  of  this  accusation,  and  knew  very  well  that  no  sucli 
sedition  as  they  charged  could  have  existed  Avithout  his  knowl- 
edge, or  would  have  disturbed  these  restless,  seditious  Jews,  if  it 
had  been  never  so  serious.  He  knew  they  were  ready  enough  to 
throw  off  the  Roman  yoke  if  only  some  leader  powerful  enough 
might  appear,  t(»  be  their  head.  Hence  he  saw  that  they  were 
pushing  this  prosecution  "  for  envy." 

35.  Pilate  answered,  Am  I  a  Jew  ?  Thine  own  nation 
and  tlie  cliief  priests  have  delivered  tliee  unto  nie :  what 
hast  thou  done  ? 

o'o.  Jesus  answered,  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world  :  if 
my  kingdom  were  of  this  world,  then  would  my  servants 
fight,  that  I  should  not  be  delivered  to  the  Jews :  but  now 
is  my  kingdom  not  from  hence. 

"Am  T  a  Jew  ?  "  seems  a  little  sharp — as  if  his  equanimity  or 
his  notions  of  personal  dignity  were  slightly  disturbed  by  this 

plain  question  from  the  prisoner. The  crime  charged  (he  seems 

to  imply)  must  pertain  to  the  Jewish  religion.  Thou  shouldest 
not  expect  me  to  be  versed  in  those  matters.  Please  not  take  me 
for  a  Jew :  I  am  a  Roman.  Thine  own  nation  have  brought  thee 
before  me  under  the  charge  of  sedition  :  it  is  my  business  to  put 

the  question— What  hast  thou  done? To  this  Jesus  answers 

squarely  ;  "  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world."  It  differs  totally 
from  the  kingdoms  of  earth.  It  claims  no  civil  jurisdiction  ; 
exa,cts  no  tribute ;  forbids  no  proper  allegiance  to  kingdoms 
which  are  of  this  world  ;  resorts  never  to  force  of  arms.  My 
servants,  you  must  have  known,  were  not  allowed  to  fight  to 
shield  me  from  arrest.     My  kingdom  comes  not  of  human  power; 

was  never  won  by  the  sword ;  has  no  earthly  origin. So  fiir 

the  reply  of  Jesus  is  substantially  negative — saying  what  his 
kingdom  is  not.     This  sufficed  to  rebut  the  charge  of  treason. 

37.  Pilate  therefore  said  unto  him,  Ari  thou  a  king  then? 
Jesus  answered,  Thou  sayest  that  I  am  a  king.  To  this  end 
was  I  born,  and  for  this  cause  came  I  into  the  world,  that  I 
should  bear  witness  unto  the  truth.  Every  one  that  is  of 
the  truth  heareth  my  voice. 

Thy  words  (Pilate  seems  to  say)  imply,  however,  that  thou  art 
a  king:  how  is  this?     Art  thou  really  a  king  ?     If  so,  what  sort 


276  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XVIII. 

of  a  king  ? Jesus  meets  this  question  also  with  most  entire 

frankness.  It  is  as  thou  sayest ;  I  am  a  king.  For  it  should  be 
noticed  that  the  \Yords — "Thou  sayest  that  I  am" — are  equiva- 
lent to — I  am  as  thou  sayest :  it  is  as  thou  hast  said. 1  was 

born  a  king ;  I  came  into  the  world  to  reign  as  king,  or  what 
amounts  to  the  same  thing — "  that  I  should  bear  witness  unto  the 
truth."  For  my  kingdom  is  an  empire  of  trnih.  "  Every  one 
that  is  of  the  truth  " — whose  heart  receives  and  loves  the  truth — 
hears  my  voice  and  is  one  of  my  subjects — is  a  member  of  vnj 
kingdom.  Thus  it  will  be  seen,  Jesus  does  not  object  to  the 
words  used  in  the  charge  brought  against  him,  but  rests  his  de- 
fense upon  his  definition  of  their  true  meaning.     In  the  sense  in 

which  he  is  a  king,  his  claim  to  be  one  is  no  crime. He  came 

from  heaven  to  earth  to  bring  to  men  messages  of  truth ;  to  reveal 
great  truths  respecting  God  and  man;  God's  rightful  claims; 
nnxn's  rebellion  against  those  claims;  the  law  God  has  enjoined; 
the  guilt  and  condemnation  of  the  race  as  sinners;  the  redemp- 
tion provided  through  his  Son,  and  the  offer  of  free  pardon  to  the 
penitent  and  believing; — such  were  the  vital  points  in  this  great 
realm  of  truth  of  which  Jesus  is  king.  To  receive  and  obey  this 
truth  is  to  render  the  homage  and  service  due  under  this  king- 
dom. Over  all  such  obedient,  loving  hearts,  Jesus  reigns.  This 
and  such  is  his  kingdom. 

38.  Pilate  saith  unto  him,  What  is  trutli?  And  when  lie 
had  said  this,  he  went  out  again  unto  the  Jews,  and  saith 
unto  them,  I  find  in  him  no  fault  at  all. 

39.  But  ye  have  a  custom,  that  I  should  release  unto  you 
one  at  the  passover:  will  ye  therefore  that  I  release  unto 
you  the  King  of  the  Jews  ? 

40.  Then  cried  they  all  again,  saying,  Not  this  man,  but 
Barabbas.     Now  Barabbas  was  a  robber. 

Pilate  said,  "  What  is  truth  ?  "  with  a  slight  emphasis  on  "  ^s," 
signifying,  not  that  he  never  heard  that  word  before;  not  that  he 
had  no  idea  of  truth  as  contrasted  with  falsehood;  but  intending 
to  ask — What  precisely  dost  thou  mean  by  "truth"?  AVhat  is 
truth  as  the  Avord  cometh  from  thy  lips  ?  What  kind  of  truth  is 
that  to  which  thou  bearest  witness,  and  which  maketh  thee  a 
king  ? Then  suddenly  checking  himself  as  if  this  rising  in- 
quiry might  lead  where  he  chose  not  to  go — perhaps  recoiling 
from  the  subject  as  one  likely  to  come  too  closely  home  to  his 
own  ungodly  soul — or  arresting  the  inquiry  as  being  aside  from 
his  official  business,  he  gave  no  opportunity  for  the  Great 
Teacher  to  answer  his  question,  but  went  out  again  to  the  waiting 
Jews  to  say — "  I  find  in  this  man  no  fault  at  all."  The  charge 
of  sedition  which  ye  bring  against  him  must  be  entirely  ground- 
less. He  may  have  some  peculiar  religious  notions;  and  perhaps 
he  may  have  come  down  from  heaven  as  he  says : — I  dare  not — 
can  not — condemn  him  to  death.     But  (he  adds)  let  me  suggest  a 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIX.  2/7 

plan  which  will  relieve  both  you  and  myself,  viz.  that  accord inji 
to  your  custom  of  having  one  prisoner  released  at  this  festival, 

ye  consent  that  I  release  this  Jesus — the  king  of  the  Jews. 

Nothing  could  be  more  distasteful  to  the  Jews;  any  thing  else 
would  please  them  better;  all  Avith  one  voice  cry  aloud — "Not 

this  man,  but  Barabbas." John  remarks  that  this  "  Barabbas 

Avas  a  robber;"  Mark,  more  fully,  that  he  "lay  bound  with 
others  who  had  made  insurrection  with  him,  and  had  committed 
murder  in  the  insurrection"  (15:  7) — in  which  points  Luke  con- 
curs. Matthew  and  Mark  inform  us  that  "  the  chief  priests  and 
ciders  persuaded  the  multitudes  to  ask  Barabljas  and  to  destroy 
Jesus."  So  Pilate  is  again  frustrated  in  his  endeavor  to  satisfy 
at  once  his  own  convictions  of  right,  and  the  demands  of  those 
infuriated,  prejudiced,  persistent  Jews. 


oo><!^o 


CHAPTER    XIX. 

The  author  concludes  his  narrative  of  the  trial  of  Jesus  before 
Pilate  (vs.  l-l'J);  speaks  of  the  crucifixion  (vs.  17,  18);  of  the 
title  put  by  Pilate  upon  the  cross  (vs.  19-22)  ;  of  the  disposal  of 
his  I'aiment  (vs.  23,  24) ;  relates  how  Jesus  committed  his  mother 
to  John  (vs.  25-27)  ;  the  final  death-scene  (28-30) ;  the  body  taken 
from  the  cross  and  pierced  (31-37);  then  linally  embalmed  and 
placed  in  its  sepulcher  (38-42). 

1.  Then  Pilate  therefore  took  Je.sus,  and  scourged  him. 

2.  And  the  soldiers  platted  a  crown  of  thorns,  and  put  it 
on  his  head,  and  they  put  on  him  a  purple  robe, 

3.  And  said,  Hail,  King  of  the  Jews!  and  they  smote  him 
with  their  hands. 

This  scourging  and  these  insults  were  concessions  by  Pilate  to 
the  malice  of  the  Jews,  made  probably  in  the  hope  that  they 
would  be  satisfied  with  these  inflictions  and  would  cease  to  de- 
mand his  life.  The  effect  on  them  was  the  very  opposite ;  they 
were  the  more  sure  of  their  power  and  of  Pilate's  weakness.  It 
was  Pilate's  capital  mistake;  he  lacked  the  courage  to  stand  up 
to  his  moral  convictions.  Perhaps  he  had  not  fully  learned  be- 
fore that  bad  men,  infuriatd  Avith  passion,  are  not  to  be  managed 

by  concession. Note  that  the  whole  course  of  the  trial  before 

Pilate  puts  the  charge  of  sedition  in  the  foreground.  We  hear 
little  of  the  charge  of  blasphemy,  but  Jesus  is  treated  as  one  Avho 
pretended,  claimed,  to  be  the  King  of  the  Jcavs.     Hence  the  form 

of  these   insults. The  better   textual  authorities  begin  v.  3 — 

"And  they  came  to  him  and  said,"  etc. — making  more  emphatio 


278  GOSPEL  OF   JOHN.— CHAP.   XIX. 

the    formal,    perhaps   insulting,  approach,  in    the    vay  of  mock 
homage. 

4.  Pilate  therefore  went  forth  again,  and  saith  unto 
them,  Behold,  I  bring  him  forth  to  you,  that  ye  may  know 
that  I  find  no  fault  in  him. 

5.  Then  came  Jesus  forth,  wearing  the  crown  of  thorns, 
and  the  purple  robe.  And  Pilate  saith  unto  them,  Behold 
the  man! 

Again  Pilate  comes  out  from  his  court-room  to  report  to  the 
Jews — Xo  proof  against  the  accused ;  I  find  no  fault  in  him. — 
How  much  and  what  Pilate  meant  in  his  words — "  ]5ehold  the 
man!"  is  not  entirely  clear.  Perhaps  this:  You  see  him  humil- 
iated and  insulted: — Will  not  this  suiEce  you?  You  see  also  that 
he  is  powerless  for  any  harm  in  the  line  of  sedition — nothing 
but  the  pageant  of  a  king.  Why  should  ye  fear  mischief  from 
such  a  man?  Can  ye  not  therefore  on  the  ground  of  his  harm- 
Icssness  consent  that  I  release  him  and  let  him  go  ? 

6.  When  the  chief  priests  therefore  and  officers  saw  him, 
they  cried  out,  saying,  Crucify  him,  crucify  him.  Pilate 
saith  unto  them.  Take  ye  him,  and  crucify  him:  for  I  find 
no  fault  in  him, 

7.  The  Jews  answered  him.  We  have  alaAV,  and  by  our  law 
he  ought  to  die,  because  he  made  himself  the  Son  of  God. 

"When  they  saw  him" — he  having  been  for  a  season  with- 
drawn from  their  view  in  -the  Roman  court-room,  into  wdiich  it 
would  defile  them  to  enter.  As  he  came  again  before  their  ej'es, 
they  raise  yet  more  fiercely  the  cry — Crucify  him  I  To  this,  Pi- 
late replies — Take  him  and  crucify  him  yourselves,  if  so  ye 
will — on  your  own  responsibility — not  on  mine.  I  find  no  fault 
in  him,  and  I  can  not  crucify  a  man  whom  I  believe  to  be  inno- 
cent of  crime. — The  Jews  seem  here  to  concede  at  least  tacitly, 
that  the  charge  of  sedition  is  of  no  particular  account,  for  they 
fall  back  upon  their  original  charge — blasphemy.  "  We  have  a 
law,  and  by  the  law  "  (so  the  best  authorities,  instead  of  ovr 
law)  "  he  ought  to  die." — The  reading,  "  By  the  law,"  being  ac- 
cepted, is  stronger,  as  the  reading,  "  our  law"  is  weaker — since 
this  latter  makes  the  laAV  only  a  Jewish  thing.  They  would  fain 
claim  for  this  statute  the  dignity  and  authority  of  universal  law. 

8.  When  Pilate  therefore  heard  that  saying,  he  was  the 
more  afraid; 

9.  And  went  again  into  the  judgment  hall,  and  saith  unto 
Jesus,  Whence  art  thou?     But  Jesus  gave  him  no  answer. 

,  10.  Then  saith  Pilate  unto  him,  Speakest  thou  not  unto 
me  ■?  knowest  thou  not  that  I  have  power  to  crucify  thee, 
and  have  power  to  release  thee? 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIX.  279 

That  Jesus  claimed  to  bo  the  Son  of  God  springs  new  thouglits 
in  the  uiind  of  Pilate.  What — he  says  to  himself — can  this 
mean?  There  is  a  strange  dignity  in  his  bearing;  a  tone  and 
air  of  innocence  as  Avell  as  integrity  that  I  can  not  understand. 
1  wish  I  might  be  rid  of  this  responsibility;  how  can  I  give  com- 
mand for  his  causeless  murder  l)y  these  maddened  Jews? 

Again  he  resumes  liis  place  on  his  tribunal  to  push  his  in- 
quiries as  to  the  origin,  the  birth,  and  sonship  of  his  prisoner. 
To  his  surprise  and  somewhat  to  his  displeasure,  Jesus  gave  him 
no  answer.  His  official  dignity  Avas  touched; — Dost  thou  not  rec- 
ognize my  authority  to  release  thee  or  to  crucify  ? 

11.  Jesus  answei'ed,  Thou  couldest  have  no  power  at  all 
against  me,  except  it  were  given  thee  from  above:  therefore 
he  that  delivered  me  unto  thee  hath  the  greater  shi. 

12.  And  from  thenceforth  Pihite  sought  to  release  him: 
but  the  Jews  cried  out,  saying.  If  thou  let  this  man  go,  thou 
art  not  Cesar's  friend:  who.-oever  maketh  himself  a  king 
speaketh  against  Cesar. 

Abating  nought  from  his  high  claim  of  being  the  Son  of  God, 
but  virtually  assuming  this  sonship  more  distinctly  than  ever  be- 
fore in  this  judicial  presence,  Jesus  intimates  to  Pilate  that  his 
power  would  be  of  no  account  if  God  from  above  had  not  per- 
mitted these  proceedings  for  purposes  far  other  than  lioman 
Judge,  or  blinded,  maddened  Jew,  was  aware  of  Judas  who  be- 
trayed him  to  their  hand  knew  better  than  they  could  know 
whence  Jesus  came.  His  sin  in  betraying  One  whom  he  knew  to 
be  the  Son  of  God  was  feai'fully  damning. 

These  words  made  a  yet  deeper  impression  upon  Pilate.  From 
that  point  he  sought  more  earnestly  to  release  Jesus — so  the  lan- 
guage must  imply.  But  he  had  begun  to  make  concessions ;  the 
accusing  party  push  their  demands,  returning  to  the  attack  with 
more  desperate  determination,  giving  Pilate  to  understand  that  it 
was  at  the  peril  of  his  place  if  not  of  his  head,  to  let  this  man 
go.  They  knew  they  could  accuse  Pilate  before  Caesar;  he  also 
knew  they  could;  and  this  fear  at  last  brought  him  to  their  terms. 
Roman  Procurators  in  the  provinces  held  office  on  a  most  precari- 
ous tenure.  The  history  of  those  times  recites  numerous  cases 
of  their  arraignment  befoi'c  the  powers  at  Rome. 

13.  When  Pilate  therefore  heard  that  saying,  he  brought 
Jesus  forth,  and  sat  down  in  the  judgment  seat  in  a  place 
that  is  called  the  Pavement,  but  in  the  Hebrew,  Gabbatha. 

1-4.  And  it  was  the  jireparation  of  the  passover,  and  about 
the  sixth  hour:  and  he  saith  unto  the  Jews,  Behold  your 
King ! 

15.  But  they  cried  out.  Away  with  him,  aAvay  with  him, 
crucify  him.     Pilate  saith  unto  them,  Shall  I  crucify  your 


280  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIX. 

King?     The  chief  priests  answered,  We  have  no  king  but 
Cesar. 

16.  Then  delivered  he  him  therefore  unto  them  to  be  cru- 
cified.    And  they  took  Jesus,  and  led  hhn  away 

That  last  remark  touched  Pilate  in  his  most  susceptible  point. 
ITis  sense  of  justice  gave  way  before  his  personal  fear  of  losing 
his  place  through  the  ill-will  of  these  leading  Jcavs.  To  bring  .Jesus 
forth  from  his  own  court-room  into  the  open  area  called  "  the 
Pavement"  where  his  accusers  M'ere  standing  indicated  that  he 
had  a,t  length  fully  yielded  to  their  demands.  Now  his  procla- 
mation to  tlieiu  is — "  Behold  your  King !  "  There  he  stands,  sur- 
rendered to  your  will ;  what  do  you  say  ? — Again,  they  raise  their 
sliout,  Away  with  him  ;  Crucify  him  !  Shall  1  crucify  your  king  ? 
vsaid  Pilate.  "  We  have  no  king,"  said  they,  "  but  Csesar" — very 
profuse  in  their  professions  of  loyalty  to  Caesar.  Just  then  it  was 
more  adroit  than  honest  to  make  these  flaming  professions.  They 
sought  to  impress  Pilate,  not  more  with  the  conviction  of  their 
own  loyalty  than  of  their  influence  at  Rome,  to  be  wielded  against 
him  if  he  should  refuse  to  meet  their  demands.  At  last  he  de- 
livered Jesus  to  their  will  to  be  crucified. 

Ere  we  drop  the  case  of  Pilate,  let  us  note  certain  points  made 
in  the  other  evangelists  only. Luke  relates  that  Christ's  ac- 
cusers spake  of  his  "  stirring  up  the  people,  beginning  from  Gal- 
ilee:  "  that  thereupon  Pilate  inquired  if  he  were  a  Galilean,  and 
learning  that  he  was,  sent  him  to  llerod — then  in  the  city,  and  at 
that  time  tctrarch  of  Galilee; — glad  no  doubt  to  divide  if  not  al- 
together escape  the  unwelcome  responsibility  of  the  case.  Herod 
had  often  heard  of  Jesus ;  was  curious  to  see  him ;  hoped  to  see 
some  miracle  done  by  him.  Jesus  was  reticent  before  him. 
Herod  so  far  succumbed  to  the  popular  furor  as  to  allow  his  men 
of  war  to  set  the  prisoner  at  nought,  and  cruelly  insult  and  abuse 
him; — but  sent    him  back    to    Pilate    as   one  not   convicted  of 

crime. To  this  Matthew  adds  that  in  the  early  morning  hour 

of  the  trial,  Pilate's  wife  sent  him  this  message:  "Have  thou 
nothing  to  do  with  that  just  man;  for  I  have  suffered  many 
things  this  day  in  a  dream  because  of  him."  The  hand  of  the 
Lord  is  sometimes  traceable  in  dreams. — This  message  had  weight 
with  Pilate,  heightening  his  trouble  of  conscience — not  to  say, 
his  superstitious  fears ;  yet  not  quite  saving  him  from  his  great 
crime. Matthew  records  the  final  effort  of  Pilate  to  purge  him- 
self from  the  responsibility  of  this  judicial  murder  and  to  trans- 
fer it  to  his  accusers  :  "  When  Pilate  saw  that  he  could  prevail 
nothing,  but  that  rather  a  tumult  Avas  made,  he  took  water  and 
washed  his  hands  before  the  multitude,  saying — I  am  innocent 
of  the  blood  of  this  just  person;  see  ye" — or  more  literally,  ye 
shall  see.  His  meaning  seems  to  be— Assume  ye  for  yourselves 
this  responsibility.  They  so  understood  it  and  assumed  the  re- 
sponsibility in  those  memorable,  awful  words — "  His  blood  be  on 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIFAP.  XIX.  281 

lis  and  on  oiu*  children !  " Never  were  words  of  imprecation 

more  fearfully  visited  upon  their  authors  in  the  horrors  of  divine 
retribution.  Ere  those  who  were  children  then  passed  from  the 
stage  of  life,  Titus,  at  the  head  of  the  Roman  legions,  invested  Je- 
rusalem; laid  it  utterly  desolate  ;  and  buried  in  its  ruins  all  but  the 
whole  living  generation.  Particularly  it  is  related  by  Josephus — 
personally  cognizant  of  the  facts — that  an  immense  number  of 
Jews,  made  prisoners  during  the  siege,  were  tortured  and  cruci- 
fied on  the  high  grounds  adjacent  to  the  city  walls — crucified  in 
such  numbers  "  that  there  was  not  room  for  tlie  crosses  to  stand 
by  each  other ;  and  that  at  last  they  had  not  wood  enough  to 
make  crosses  of." 

Of  the  final  earthly  doom  of  Pilate,  reliable  history  gives 
some  account;  doubtful  tradition  has  said  much  more.  It  is 
well  authenticated  that  the  evil  he  so  much  dreaded — that  of 
being  arraigned  before  Ca3sar  for  mal-administration — came  upon 
him,  and  cost  him  his  official  place  (about  A.  I).  36).  "The  se- 
quel" (says  EUicott — "Life  of  Christ,"  p.  316)  "is  said  to  have 
been  disgrace  and  misfortune  (Eusebius),  and  not  long  afterward, 
death  by  his  own  hand." 

On  verse  15,  two  incidental  points  arise  Avhich  involve  critical 
questions.  The  first  respects  "  the  preparation  of  the  Passover." 
Did  not  Jesus  and  his  disciples  "  prepare  "  for  the  Passover  on 
the  day  previous  to  this  and  eat  the  Paschal  lamb  on  the  even- 
ing  previous  ?      How  then  can   this  be  the  day  of  prepai'ation 

for  the  Passover? The  best  explanation  seems  to  me   to   be 

this:  that  the  Greek  word  for  "preparation"*  refers  here  to  the 
8ab])atli  rather  than  to  the  day  before  the  Passover  began.  Mark 
implies  this  (15:  42):  "because  it  was  the  prepai'ation,  ?.  e.  the 
day  before  the  Sabbath;  "  and  John  (19:  31)  supports  this  view: 
— "  Bectiuse  it  was  the  2'>^(^pC'i'O't'0i^^  that  the  bodies  should  not 
remain  upon  the  cross  on  the  Sabbath  day  (for  that  Sabbath 
day  was  an  high  day)."  Referring  it  thus  to  the  Sabbath,  we 
obviate  the  difiiculty.  The  Paschal  lamb  was  eaten  on  Thurs- 
daj'-  evening,  preparation  for  this  having  been  made  during  the 
day  previous;  Friday  in  the  early  morning  came  on  the  judicial 
proceedings ;  then  the  crucifi.Kion  from  about  9  a.  m.  to  3  p.  M.  ; 
then  late  in  the  day  the  requisite  preparation  for  the  great  Jew- 
ish Sabbath  on  Saturday — extra  "great"  when  its  sanctity  was 
augmented  by  that  of  the  Passover  feast.  In  this  case  the  day 
of  preparation  for  the  Sab})ath  was  not  the  same  as  the  day  of 
preparation  for  the  Paschal  laml),  biit  was  one  day  later.  The 
preparation  for  the  Sabbath  is  specially  intended  in  this  passage. 

Tho  other  point  is  the  date  given  here — "  al)0ut  the  sixth 
hour."  Was  this  Roman  time,  or  Jewish?  As  the  Romans 
(whom  modern  nations  follow)  reckotied  from  midnight,  their 
system  would  make  the  time  6  a.  m.  As  the  Jews  reckoned 
from  the  average  sunrise,  •/.   e.  6  a.  m.,   tlicir  sixth  hour  would 

*  -apaaiiEvi], 


282  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIX. 

be  12  M.  Apai't  from  the  exiffencies  of  this  passage,  the  Jew- 
ish system  is  the  more  probable.  But  so  late  an  hour  as  12  M. 
is  impossible.  For  the  sufferings  on  the  cross  were  protracted 
thi'ough  six  hours,  commencing  according  to  Mark  (15:  25)  at 
the  Jewish  third  hour  (9  a.  m.)  and  terminating  in  death  at  the 
ninth  hour — 3  p.  m.  (Mark  15:  33,  37).  Moreover,  the  bodies 
remained  some  time  on  the  cross  after  Jesus  had  expired,  and 
yet  were  taken  down  before  sunset  of  that  day.  The  dates  by 
Mark  correspond  so  entirely  with  all  the  recorded  circumstances 
and  with  the  necessities  of  the  case  that  they  must  be  accepted 

as  essentially  accurate. It  may  have   been   slightly  later  than 

the  third  hour  when  the  crucifixion  commenced ;  and  John's 
statement  may  be  taken  as  very  general  and  approximative — ?'.  e. 
the  time  may  have  been  nearer  the  sixth  hour  than  any  other 
general  division  of  the  day.     This  explanation  does  not  entirely 

remove  the  difficulty;    yet  may  be  the  best  we  can   suggest. 

There  is  some  authority  for  reading  in  John  "  third  "  instead  of 
"  sixth"  hour;  but  not  sufficient  to  justify  this  change  of  text. 

17.  And  he  bearing  his  cross  went  fortli  into  a  place 
called  the  place  of  a  skull,  which  is  called  in  the  Hebrew 
Golgotha  : 

18.  Where  they  crucified  him,  and  two  others  with  him, 
on  either  side  one,  and  Jesus  in  the  midst. 

On  the  question — By  whom  was  the  cross  borne?  the  impi-ovod 
text  in  John  (v.  17)  makes  it — "He,  bearing  the  cross  by  him- 
self—implying that  at  least  in  the  outset  he  bore  the  cross 
alone.  Both  Matthew  and  Mark  say  they  laid  hold  of  one 
Simon  and  compelled  him  to  bear  it;  while  Luke  gives  (perhaps) 
the  most  exact  statement — "On  him  they  laid  the  cross  that  he 
might  bear  it  after  Jesus  " — i.  e.  might  boar  one  end  of  it,  walk- 
ing behind  .lesus,  to  relieve  him  in  part  of  its  burden,  the  whole 

being  found   to  be  bej^ond  his  strength. The  locality  of  the 

crucifixion  can  not  be  fixed  with  certainty.  It  was  outside  the 
city  walls,  yet  not  remote,  but  near  a  very  considerable  thorough- 
fare of  travel  (v.  20). 

Death  by  crucifixion  was  intended  to  be  a  slow,  lingering  pro- 
cess, but  one  of  terrible  tortui-e.  The  frame — one  post  with  a 
transverse  beam  crossing  it  near  the  upper  end — was  first  laid  on 
the  ground  and  the  prisoner  fastened  to  it  by  means  of  a  spike 
("nail")  driven  through  the  palm  of  each  hand  into  the  trans- 
verse beam  along  which  the  arms  were  stretched ;  and  by  another 
driven  through  the  feet  into  the  upright  post.  It  is  doubtful 
Avhether  each  foot  was  spiked  separately,  or  vA'hether  the  same 
spike  was  driven  through  both.  This  is  a  point  of  no  special  im- 
portance. In  all  other  respects  the  mode  is  well  known.  After 
the  subject  had  been  fastened  to  his  cross,  it  was  raised  with  him 
upon  it  and  fixed  in  an  upright  position,  where  he  must  hang 
upon  these  spikes  till  death  put  an  end  to  his  agony. -Under 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIX.  283 

such  physical  torture  the  life-forces  of  our  hlossed  Redeemer 
■were  worn  away,  till  endurance  failed  him  and  life  became  ex- 
tinct under  the  exhaustion  of  his  agonies. 

Luke,  and  he  only,  has  given  us  the  very  striking  scene  between 
Jesus  and  the  penitent  thief. 

19.  And  Pilate  wrote  a  title,  and  put  it  on  the  cross. 
And  the  writing  Avas,  JESUS  OF  NAZARETH  THE 
KING   OF  THE  JEWS. 

20.  This  title  then  read  many  of  the  Jews ;  for  the  ])lace 
where  Jesus  Avas  crucified  was  nigh  to  the  city :  and  it  was 
written  in  Hebrew,  aiid  Greek,  cuvd  Latin. 

21.  Then  said  the  chief  priests  of  the  Jews  to  Pilate, 
Write  not,  The  King  of  the  Jews  ;  but  that  he  said,  I  am 
King  of  the  Jews. 

22.  Pilate  answered,  "What  I  have  written  I  have  written. 

On  the  part  of  Pilate,  this  title  may  have  been  a  prudential 
measure — a  public  testimony  for  his  own  vindication  to  the  effect 
that  this  man  was  executed  under  the  charge  of  sedition,  claim- 
ing to  be  the  King  of  the  Jews,  and  therefore  in   arms  against 

the  Roman  power. The  emendation  suggested  by  the  Jews  (v. 

21)  was  not  to  Pilate's  mind.  Perhaps  his  reply  tacitly  signified 
— Ye  have  shown  full  as  much  of  the  spirit  of  dictation  in  this 
Avhole  matter  as  I  am  pi-epared  to  bear.  If  the  form  in  which  I 
have  put  it  should  be  a  little  humiliating  to  your  nation,  perhaps 
ye  have  deserved  it. 

23.  Then  the  soldiers,  when  they  had  crucified  Jesus,  took 
his  garments,  and  made  four  parts,  to  every  soldier  a. part ; 
and  also  his  coat :  now  the  coat  Avas  without  seam,  woven 
from  the  top  throughout. 

24.  They  said  therefore  among  themselves,  Let  us  not 
rend  it,  but  cast  lots  for  it,  whose  it  shall  be :  that  the 
Scripture  might  be  fulfilled,  which  saith,  They  parted  my 
raiment  among  them,  and  for  my  vesture  they  did  cast  lots. 
'Jliese  things  therefore  the  soldiers  did. 

Four  was  the  number  of  soldiers  assigned  for  the  execution  of 

tliis  sentence. The  clothing  of  the  sufferer  was  by  usage  one 

of  the  perquisites  for  this  service. The  Scripture  referred  to 

here  as  fulfilled  is  Ps.  22  :  18  :  "  They  part  my  garments  among 
them,  and  cast  lots  upon  my  vesture."  Occurring  in  a  Psalm, 
tlie  whole  of  which  may  most  appositely  be  referred  to  the  Mes- 
siah, this  is  one  of  the  most  minute  among  all  Scripture  proph- 
ecies. No  wonder  John  should  take  this  special  notice  of  its  pre- 
cise fulfillment.  These  points  never  had  any  known  fulfillment 
in  the  case  of  David.  No  fulfillment  meets  their  significance  ex- 
cept in  these  events  here  narrated.     The  reader  is  referred  to  my 


284  GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIX. 

notes  on  Ps.  22  for  the  proof  that  the  entire  Psalm  refers  to  the 
Messiah,  and  has  had  a  definite  fultillinent  throughout  in  him 
and  in  him  only. 

25.  Now  there  stood  by  the  cross  of  Jesus  his  mother,  and 
his  mother's  sister,  Mary  the  ivife  of  Cleophas,  aud  Mary 
Magdalene. 

26.  When  Jesus  therefore  saw  his  mother,  and  the  disciple 
standing  by,  whom  he  loved,  he  saith  unto  his  mother, 
Woman,  behold  thy  Son! 

27.  Then  saith  he  to  the  disciple,  Behold  thy  mother ! 
And  from  that  hour  that  disciple  took  her  unto  his  own 
Jioine. 

Naturally  a  deep  interest  gathers  about  the  names  and  history 
of  these  women.  That  in  this  eventful  hour,  when  not  one  of 
the  eleven  (apparently)  save  John,  was  neai-,  while  the  Great  Suf- 
ferer was  passing  through  his  last,  most  bitter  agonies — there 
Avere  women  whose  courage  was  equal  to  the  emergency,  whose 
sympathizing  love  held  them  to  the  scene  ;  whose  hearts  yearned 
to  minister  in  any  way  possible  for  them  to  his  comfort  or  relief; 
and  who  yet,  if  nothing  else  could  be  done,  would  still  stand  near, 
waiting,  weeping,  loving ; — such  women  as  these  command  our 
admiration,  and  we  may  wish  that  we  knew  their  history  far  bet- 
ter than  we  do. 

Neither  of  the  gospel  historians  gives  the  names  of  the  Avhole 
group,  each  naming  only  the  more  prominent,  and  giving  these 
with  some  divei'sity  of  name.  Thus  we  have — (1)  Mary  the 
mother  of  Jesus ; — (2)  One  described  as  "  Mary  the  mother  of 
James  and  Joses,"  and  also  as  "  the  wife  of  Cleophas  ;  "  (3)  Sa- 
lome, the  mother  of  Zebedee's  sons  (James  and  John)  ;   (4)  Mary 

Magdalene. Of  their  history  as  elsewhere  developed  it  is  not 

in  place  here  to  speak.  Their  presence  here  and  the  spirit  they 
manifested  are  an  honor  to  woman.  We  love  to  do  them  honor. 
There  were  others,  in  considerable  numljer,  associated  with  them 
in  sympathy,  in  jmtient  attendance,  in  devoted  affection. Ap- 
parently their  presence  here  is  alluded  to  by  John  for  the  purpose 
of  stating  another  fiict  of  tender  interest.  As  Jesus  saw  both  his 
mother  and  the  disciple  he  specially  loved  standing  near  him  and 
near  to  each  other,  he  said  to  his  mother,  "Behold  thy  son;" 
and  to  the  beloved  disciple,  "  Behold  thy  mother."  It  was  a  del- 
icate, tender  way  of  committing  the  mother  that  bare  him  to  the 
fostering  care  of  this  disciple  for  whatever  years  of  her  earthly 
pilgrimage  might  yet  remain.  From  that  hour  this  disciple  "took 
her  to  his  own" — as  his  own  mother,  to  share  with  him  all  that 
his  family  home  could  supply.  It  was  the  last  tribute  of  filial 
affection  on  the  part  of  the  Great  Sufferer,  and  can  be  duly  ap- 
preciated only  as  Ave  think  of  it  as  said  under  the  fearful  panga 
of  his  dying  agony. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CILVr.  XIX.  285 

28.  After  this,  Jesus  knowing  that  all  things  were  now  ac- 
complished, that  the  Scripture  might  be  fulfilled,  saith,  I 
thirst, 

29.  Now  there  was  set  a  vessel  full  of  vinegar :  and  they 
filled  a  sponge  with  vinegar,  and  put  it  upon  hyssop,  and 
put  it  to  his  mouth. 

30.  When  Jesus  therefoi-e  had  received  the  vinegar,  he 
said,  It  is  finished :  and  he  bowed  his  head,  and  gave  up  the 
ghost. 

The  "  all  things  now  accomplished"  would  seem  to  be  specially 
the  siifFcrings  he  was  to  endure  both  as  to  kind  and  amount.  Je- 
sus knowing  that  he  had  drained  this  fearful  cup  to  its  bottom, 
and  hence  Avas  near  his  end — in  order  to  fulfill  yet  one  more 
prediction,  cried — "  I  thirst."  This  is  supposed  to  refer  to  Ps.  69: 
21 :  "  In  my  thirst  they  gave  me  vinegar  to  drink."  Great  thirst 
is  one  of  the  effects  of  such  extreme  suffering.  At  an  earlier 
hour  according  to  Matthew  (27:  34)  they  had  offered  him  "vine- 
gar mingled  with  gall,"  or  as  described  by  Mark  (15:  23)  "wine 
mingled  with  myrrh ;  "  but  when  he  tasted  he  would  not  drink. 
This  sour  wine,  prepared  Avith  so-called  "  gall  "  or  "  myrrh  "  was 
intended  to  be  an  anesthetic,  to  deaden  the  sense  of  pain — which 
seems  to  have  been  the  reason  why  Jesus  would  not  drink.  He 
was  there  to  suffoi- — not  to  spare  himself  any  part  of  the  cup 
given  him  of  the  Father  to  drink.  But  after  all  the  prescribed 
and  predicted  sufferings  had  been  endured,  it  was  joroper  to  give 
expression  to  his  dreadful  thirst,  and  not  improper  to  taste  the 
vinegar  presented  to  his  lips.  This  done,  he  cried — "  It  is  fin- 
ished"— the  dreadful  agony  is  all  borne;  the  great  work  is  done! 
— and  died! 

At  this  point  it  can  not  be  amiss  to  group  together  the  various 
utterances  of  Jesus  on  the  way  to  his  cross  and  while  suspended 
upon  it,  as  recorded  by  the  several  evangelists,  no  one  of  Avhom 
has  given  them  all. 

Following  the  probable  order  of  time,  Ave  arrange  them  thus  : 

{n)  On  the  way  to  the  cross,  to  the  Avomen  Avho  folloAved  him, 
bcAA'ailing  and  lamenting: — "Daughters  of  Jerusalem,  weep  not 
for  me,  but  weep  for  j'ourselves  and  for  your  children,"  etc.— a 
touching  testimony  to  the  unselfishness — the  deep,  matchless  com- 
passion of  his  heart;  the  very  benevolence  AA'hich  bore  him  to  the 
cross  for  guilty  man. — Recorded  by  Luke  only  (23:  27). 

(6)  His  prayer  for  his  murderers — •"  Father,  forgive  them,  for 
they  kiioAv  not  Avhat  they  do  ;  " — most  probably  uttered  Avhile  they 
Avere  nailing  him  to  his  cross.  This  also  comes  to  us  in  Luke 
only  (23 :  34). 

(c)  What  he  said  to  the  penitent  thief  on  the  cross  b}^  his  side 
— "  To-day  shalt  thou  be  Avith  me  in  Paradise."  This,  and  in- 
deed the  entire  account  of  the  penitent  thief  occurs  only  in  Luke 
(23  :  43). 

13 


286  GOSPEL  OF  JOIL\.— CHAP.  XIX. 

(d)  Xext  we  may  place  that  one  wailing  cry — which  told  all 
and  more  than  all  which  the  human  mind  can  measure — that  one 
"  loud  cry  of  unfathomable  woe  and  uttermost  desolation ;  "  * 
— "My  God,  my  God,  Avhy  hast  thou  forsaken  me?"  It  is  vain 
for  us  to  attempt  the  depth  of  meaning  or  of  ^A'oe  that  lies  in 
these  words.  It  seems  worse  than  puerile  to  say  they  were  taken 
up  from  the  lips  of  David  (Ps.  22),  and  therefore  may  have 
been  used  by  Avay  of  accommodation,  not  signifying  really  any 
such  sense  of  being  forsaken  of  God  as  the  words  from  David's 
lips  might  appropriately  express.  In  truth,  that  entire  Psalm  is 
Messianic,  speaking  prophetically  of  him  and  for  him ;  and  these 
first  words  of  it  give  us  its  key-note — the  ruling  thought  and  sense 

of  the  Great  Suflerer. These  words  occur  only  in  Matthew  and 

Mark. 

Next  in  order  wc  may  locate  the  three  expressions  recorded  by 
John  only;  viz  : 

(e)  The  Avords  said  to  his  mother  and  to  the  beloved  disciple. 
(_/)  The  exclamation,  "  I  thirst." 

(g)  And  that  other,  "  It  is  finished  !  " 

(/()  Last  of  all  the  words  given  by  Luke  only  (23:  46): 
"Father,  into  thy  hands  I  commend  my  spirit." 

Such,  so  far  as  the  various  records  report  them,  were  the  utter- 
ances which  fell  from  the  Savior's  lips  during  the  scenes  of  his 
last  sufierings — the  only  manifestations  which  have  come  down  to 
us  of  his  thought,  his  sympathies,  his  love,  and  spirit  of  forgive- 
ness, of  his  relation  to  the  Father,  and  of  his  immense  agony,  in 
that  dark  and  dying  hour.  As  last  words  of  dear  d3Mn^  friend,s 
are  treasured  in  our  deepest  heart,  so  let  these  testimonials  of  our 
greatest,  most  suffering  Friend,  lie  embalmed  in  our  souls,  cher- 
ished in  most  tender  remembrance — till  at  length  we  see  him 
face  to  face. 

Of  scenes  external  to  the  suffering  Jesus,  Matthew  has  given  the 
most  full  account : — that  from  the  sixth  hour  there  Avas  darkness 
over  all  the  land  until  the  ninth  hour;  that  the  great  vail  of  the 
temple  was  rent  in  twain  from  the  top  to  the  bottom  (signifying 
that  the  way  into  the  most  Holy  Place  was  open  to  all,  and  no 
longer  to  the  High  Priest  only) ;  that  "the  earth  did  quake,  and 
rocks  Avere  i-ent,  and  graves  Avere  opened,  and  many  bodies  of 
saints  Avhich  slept  arose,  came  out  of  their  graves,  after  his  resur- 
rection;  went  into  the  holy  city  and  appeared  unto  many." — 
This  last  named  foct,  stated  by  MatthcAV  only,  has  met  Avith  va- 
rious reception.  I  knoAV  of  no  reason  to  discredit  the  record. 
The  many  questions  Avhich  may  be  asked  and  can  not  be  an- 
SAvered — Avho  they  Avere  ;  hoAV  many ;  Avhat  became  of  them  ;  why 
they  Avere  raised  at  all;  why  these  rather  than  others;  Avhy  so 
many  and  neither  more  nor  less;  AA'hat  good  came  of  it,  etc.,  etc., 
may  be  Avisely  suffered  to  await  a  fuller  revelation  before  Ave  at- 
tempt to  answer  them.     All  Ave  need  say  is  that  in  connection 

*Ellicott,  p,  321. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIX.  287 

■with  a  scono  so  stupendous  as  the  death  of  the  Son  of  Cod,  tlie 
Prince  of  life — of  Him  who  is  the  Resurrection  and  the  Life — it  is 
by  no  means  incongruous,  unnatural,  preposterous — nothing  of  the 
kind — that  many  bodies  of  sleeping  saints  should  arise  from  their 
graves  as  here  said.  It  was  of  course  an  exceptional  case :  the 
whole  great  transaction  of  the  crucilixion  and  death  of  Jesus  was 
exceptional. 

The  deep  darkness  that  veiled  the  heavens  and  covered  the  face 
nf  the  land  for  three  hours  was  also  exceptional ;  certainly  super- 
natural, and  not  the  result  of  any  eclipse.  The  moon  being  then 
at  its  full,  an  eclipse  of  the  sun  was  a  natural  impossibility.  But 
this  hiding  of  his  glorious  face  was  signally  significant  when 
the  Great  Maker  of  the  heavens  and  earth,  in  his  incarnate  re- 
lations to  our  human  nature,  was  dying  in  mortal  agony  !  Man 
in  hisguiltand  blindness  might  be  reviling,  insulting,  torturing; — 
but  God  from  his  lofty  throne  bade  his  sun  in  the  heavens  to  hold 
its  light  and  the  forces  of  our  inner  earth  to  give  their  signals  of 
convulsion  and  horror  I 

31.  The  Jews  therefore,  l)ecause  it  was  the  preparation, 
that  the  bodies  should  not  remain  upon  the  cross  on  the  sab- 
bath day,  (for  that  sabbath  day  was  a  high  day,)  besought 
Pilate  that  their  legs  might  be  broken,  and  that  they  might 
be  taken  away. 

32.  Then  came  the  soldiers,  and  brake  the  legs  of  the 
first,  and  of  the  other  wdiich  was  crucified  Avith  him. 

33.  But  when  they  came  to  Jesus,  and  saw  that  he  was 
dead  already,  they  brake  not  his  legs  : 

34.  But  one  of  the  soldiers  with  a  spear  pierced  his  side, 
and  forthwith  came  there  out  blood  and  water. 

35.  And  he  that  saw  it  bare  record,  and  his  record  is  true  ; 
and  he  knoweth  that  he  saith  true,  that  ye  might  believe. 

36.  For  these  things  were  done,  that  the  Scripture  should 
be  fulfilled,  A  bone  of  him  shall  not  be  broken. 

37.  And  again  another  Scripture  saith.  They  shall  look 
on  him  whom  they  pierced. 

This  entire  paragraph  is  peculiar  to  John. Upon  the  word 

"  preparation,"  s-ee  note  on  v.   14. The  Mosaic  law  was  very 

specific  against  allowing  a  dead  or  suspended  body  to  remain  over 
night  upon  the  tree.  (See  Deut.  21  :  22,  23).  these  Jews  seem 
to  have  deemed  it  doubly  important  to  take  the  bodies  down  in 
this  case  because  the  following  day  was  the  Sabbath,  and  one  of 
special   sanctity,    since   it   fell  within    the    days    of  unleavened 

bread. The  custom  of  breaking  the  legs  of  those  who  suffered 

crucifixion  had  for  its  object  to  ascertain  or  to  hasten  the  event 
of  death.  It  seems  that  neither  of  the  two  thieves  were  found 
dead  but  that  Jesus  was — indicating  that  he  was  in  a  state  of  un- 
usual exhaustion  before  he  was  nailed  to  the  cross ;  or,  that  death 


288  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XIX. 

waa   hastened  by  mental    agonies  as  "well   as  physical. The 

spear  piercing  his  side  is  supposed  to  have  penetrated  the  peri- 
cardium— since  this  would  account  most  naturally  for  the  dis- 
charge of  both  blood  and  water.  This  point  is  important  physio- 
loo-ically  inasmuch  as  it  proves  most  conclusively  his  actual 
death — upon  which  fact  hangs  that  of  a  real  resurrection  from 
death. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  John  certifies  very  specifically  to  the 
discharge  of  both  blood  and  water.  But  whether  his  estimate 
of.  the  importance  of  this  fact  turned  on  its  value  as  proof  of 
actual  death,  or  upon  its  symbolical  significance — the  water,  of 
moral  cleansing ;  the  blood,  of  atonement  and  remission  of  sin — 
is  not  clear.  That  he  made  account  of  this  double  symbolism 
appears  in  his  first  epistle  (5  :  6)  :  "  This  is  he  that  came  by  wa- 
ter and  blood;  not  by  water  only,  but  by  water  and  blood." 

In  each  of  these  two  fixcts — ru)  bone  broken,  and  his  side  pierced, 
John  finds  prophecy  fulfilled.  As  to  the  former,  it  was  forbid- 
den to  break  any  bone  of  the  Paschal  lamb  (Ex.  12 :  46).  In 
Jesus,  our  Paschal  Lamb,  this  must  needs  be  fulfilled.  In  Ps.  34 : 
20,  the  same  thing  is  said  of  the  righteous:—"  He_[God}  keepeth 
all  his  bones;  not  one  of  them  is  broken."  But  this  is  a  prophecy 
as  to  Christ  only  because  in  his  human  relations  he   is  one  of 

God's  children,  cared  for  under  the  universal  law. As  to  the 

piercing  of  his  side,  see  Zech.  12:  10:  "They  shall  look  upon 
me  whom  they  have  pierced" — which  occurs  in  a  passage  prop- 
erly regarded  as  Messianic. 

38.  And  after  this  Josepli  of  Arimathea,  being  a  disciple 
of  Jesus,  but  secretly  for  fear  of  the  Jews,  besought  Pilate 
that  he  might  take  away  the  body  of  Jesus  :  and  Pilate  gave 
him  leave.     He  came  therefore,  and  took  the  body  of  Jesus. 

39.  And  there  came  also  Nicodemus,  (which  at  the  first 
came  to  Jesus  by  night,)  and  brought  a  mixture  of  myrrh 
and  aloes,  about  a  hundred  pound  weight. 

40.  Then  took  they  the  body  of  Jesus,  and  wound  it  in 
linen  clothes  with  the  spices,  as  the  manner  of  the  Jews  is 
to  bury. 

41.  Now  in  the  place  where  he  was  crucified  there  was  a 
garden ;  and  in  the  garden  a  new  sepulcher,  wherein  w\as 
never  man  yet  laid. 

42.  There  laid  they  Jesus  therefore  because  of  the  Jews' 
preparation  day;  for  the  sepulcher  was  nigh  at  hand. 

It  happened  that  the  body  of  Jesus  was  honorably  cared  for 
by  two  distinguished  Jews — Joseph  and  Nicodemus — each  of 
them  a  member  of  the  Sanhedrim;  each  a  disciple  of  Jesus, 
thouf!;h  not  publicly  known  as  such.  Each  of  the  four  evangelists 
speaks  in  high  terms  of  Joseph;  Matthew  saying  of  him — "A 
rich  man  of  Arimathea  who  himself  was  Jesus   disciple  :  "  I\lavk 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XX.  28D 

adding  to  this — "  An  honorable  counselor  who  also  waited  for 
the  kingdom  of  G(jd,  went  in  holdhj  unto  Pilate  and  craved 
the  body  of  Jesus;  "  while  Luke  says  of  him — "A  counselor,  a 
good  and  just  man  (the  same  had  not  consented  to  the  counsel 
and  deed  of  them  " — i.  e.  of  his  fellow-members  of  the  Great 
Council);  "who  also  himself  waited  for  the  kingdom  of  God." 
John,  as  we  see,  calls  him  "a  disciple  of  Jesus,  but  secretly  for 
fear  of  the  Jews." — The  part  borne  by  Nicodemus  attracted  less 
attention,  no  one  of  the  gospel  historians  save  John,  having  al- 
luded to  him  or  to  his  agency  at  all.  lie  seems  to  have  borne  no 
part  in  obtaining  the  body  from  Pilate,  but  did  contribute,  grate- 
fully we  may  hope,  to  furnish  the  necessary  materials  (one  hun- 
dred pounds  weight  of  myrrh  and  aloes)  for  laying  out  the  body 
for  interment.  Kemarkably,  all  these  provisions  for  the  interment, 
/.  c.  entombing  of  the  body,  Avere  of  the  first  class ;  a  very  large 
amount,  we  must  suppose,  of  "  myrrh  and  aloes  ;  "  "  spices  "  also, 
applied  in  the  folds  of  the  linen  cloth  that  enwrapped  the  body  ; 
a  new  sepulcher,  hewn  out  of  rock ;  itself  in  a  garden  of  rural 
beauty.  It  is  remarkable  that  up  to  the  point  of  death,  all  the 
surroundings  of  the  Crucified  One  were  savage,  cruel,  not  only 
disrespectful,  but  positively  and  intentionally  insulting — fit  only 
for  the  basest  and  meanest  of  men  ; — but  all  suddenly,  from  the 
point  of  actual  death  the  scene  changes  utterly  :  every  point  in 
his  surroundings  betokens  dignity  and  honor.  The  same  sudden 
transition  appears  in  that  celebrated  j^rophecy  (Isa.  53),  where 
we  see  him,  up  to  the  period  of  death,  "  despised  and  rejected  of 
men" — but  thence  and  onward  "with  the  rich  in  his  death,"  and 
passing  thence  to  the  highest  honors  before  God  ; — "  shall  see  of 
the  travail  of  his  soul  and  be  satisfied;"  "the  pleasure  of  the 
Lord  shall  pi-osper  in  his  hand,"  etc.,  etc.  That  was  indeed  a  point 
of  wonderful,  sublimely  glorious  transition,  where  he  could  .say 
of  all  the  pain  and  all  the  shame — "It  is  finished;  "  from  which 
onward  there  remained  only  glory  and  honor,  dominion  and 
power,  praise  and  homage,  through  all  the  eternal  ages. 


CHAPTER    XX. 

The  Resurrection  and  its  Incidents. 

It  remains  now  to  give  somewhat  fully  the  circumstances  at- 
tending and   confirming  the  resurrection  of  the  Lord. Mary 

Magdalene,  Peter  and  John,  find  the  sepulcher  empty,  the  body 
of  their  Lord  not  there  (vs.  1-10);  Mary  lingers  at  the  sacred 
spot,  weeping,  and  is  greeted  with  the  first  appearance  of  the 


290  ,        GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.   XX. 

risen  Jesus  (11-]  8);  the  same  day  at  OA'ening  Jesus  appears  sud- 
denly in  the  midst  of  the  assembled  disciples,  all  bein^o;  present 
save  Thomas  (19-23);  Thomas  is  very  skeptical  and  demands 
sensible  proofs  (24,  25) ;  the  next  Lord's  day  eveninp:  Jesus  ap- 
pears similarly  again  and  satisfies  Thomas  (26-29).  The  author 
states  his  object  in  this  book  (oO,  31.) 

1.  The  first  day  of  tlie  week  came  Mary  ]\lagdalene  early, 
^vheu  it  was  yet  dark,  unto  the  sepulcher,  and  seeth  the 
stone  taken  away  from  the  sepulcher. 

In  this  first  visit  made  by  the  faithful  ones  to  the  sepulcher,  Mary 
Magdalene  was  undoubtedly  most  prominent.  Dear  woman : — the 
love  and  gratitude  of  her  heart  to  the  Crucified  One  moved  her  to 
her  utmost  endeavors  to  minister  to  his  mortal  remains;  brought 
her  to  the  sepulcher  after  the  Sabbath  was  passed  ere  j'et  it  was  day, 
and  held  her  there  watching,  weeping,  just  in  the  state  of  mind 
to  hear  the  first  whispers  of  his  voice  and  to  be  greeted  with  the 
first  vision  of  his  presence. — —Remarkably,  while  John  names 
the  Mary  of  ]\Iagdala  only,  IMatthew  says  the  other  Mary  came 
also  to  see  the  sepulcher:  Mark  adds  to  the  list  the  name  of 
Salome,  and  moreover  tells  us  they  came,  "  having  bought  sweet 
spices  that  they  might  anoint  him."  The  hasty  service  performed 
on  the  evening  of  Friday  was  imperfect,  unfinished.  They  came 
again  to  complete  this  service  of  aifectlon  as  soon  as  possible 
after  the  Sabbath  is  passed  and  the  light  of  another  day  returns. 
In  respect  to  this  group  of  sisters,  Luke  names  but  three- 
compared  with  Mark,  giving  the  name  Joanna  in  place  of  Salome, 
and  adds,  "  certain  others  with  them."  The  precise  number  re- 
mains therefore  indefinite.  Obviously  Mary  Magdalene  was  the 
leading  spirit. They  found  the  stone  rolled  away  from  the  sep- 
ulcher, which  rolling  away  Matthew  attributes  to  an  angel  from 
heaven,  while  Mark  records  the  anxious  solicitude  of  the  Avomen 
lest  this  great  stone  should  baffle  their  purpose  of  reaching  and 
anointing  the  bod}^.  This  angel  gave  them  their  first  hint  tliat 
their  Lord  had  really  risen. 

2.  Then  she  runneth,  and  comcth  to  Simon  Peter,  and  to 
tlie  other  disciple,  whom  Jesus  loved,  and  saith  imto  them, 
They  have  taken  away  the  Lord  out  of  the  sepulclier,  and 
we  know  not  where  they  have  laid  liim. 

3.  Peter  therefore  went  forth,  and  that  other  disciple,  and 
came  to  the  sepulcher. 

4.  So  they  ran  both  together :  and  the  other  disciple  did 
outrun  Peter,  and  came  first  to  the  sepulcher. 

5.  And  he  stooping  down,  and  looking  in,  saw  the  linen 
clothes  lying ;  yet  went  he  not  in. 

6.  Then  cometh  Simon  Peter  folloAving  him,  and  went 
into  the  sepulcher,  and  seeth  the  linen  clothes  lie. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XX.  291 

7.  And  the  napkin,  that  was  about  his  head,  not  lying 
with  the  lineu  clothes,  but  wrapped  together  in  a  place  by 
itself. 

8.  Then  went  in  also  tliat  other  disciple,  which  came  first 
to  the  sepulcher,  and  he  saw,  and  believed. 

9.  For  as  yet  they  knew  not  the  Scripture,  that  he  must 
rise  again  fi'om  the  dead. 

10.  Then  tlie  disciples  went  av/ay  again  unto  their  own 
home. 

Simon  Peter  is  once  more  back  among  the  faithfid  ones^a  live 
man  in  the  group — to  wliom  Mary  Magdalene  makes  report  as 
to  one  who  will  be  prompt  to  act  in  tlie  emergency.  To  this  Peter 
and  to  Jolin  she  tells  her  thrilling  story  in  those  ever-memorable 
words:  "They  have  taken  away  the  Lord  out  of  the  sepulcher, 
and  we  know  not  Avhere  they  have  laid  him."  Who  the  parties 
were — indicated  by  her  word  "they,"  she  did  not  know:  all  was 
yet  in  darkness — only  she  had  found  the  sepulcher  empty.  Ah, 
she  did  not  know  what  they  had  done  with  those  hallowed  re- 
mains!—— The  two  discijiles  ran  for  the  sepulcher:  our  author 
remembers  the  minutest  circumstances  of  the  case;  how  he  out- 
ran his  brother  and  reached  the  sepulcher  first,  but  for  some  un- 
explained reason  did  not  go  in ;  how  Peter  came  up  soon,  and, 
true  to  his  daring,  impulsive  nature,  dashed  in;  how  he  saw  the 
linen  which  had  enfolded  the  body  carefully  laid  aside  and  the 
napkin  which  had  swathed  the  head  deposited  with  the  utmost 
order  by  itself  These  minute  particulars  are  by  no  means  value- 
less; for  they  testify  to  the  writer's  accurate  remembrance  of 
these  points,  and  (what  is  of  more  value)  they  utterly  disprove 
the  allegation  that  somebody  came  by  night]  and  stole  away  the 
body  while  the  guard  slept.  Body-snatching  is  not  wont  to  be 
done  in  this  quiet,  delicate  manner,  leaving  every  thing  arranged 
in  perfect  order ;  and  of  course,  rifling  a  sepulcher  for  the 
sake  of  the  valuables  there  would  leave  none  of  them  behind. 
These  disciples  now  saw  with  their  own  eyes  and  "be- 
lieved"— i.  e.  believed  that  he  must  have  risen  from  the  dead — 
a  new  idea  in  their  mind,  for  up  to  this  point  they  had  not  under- 
stood from  the  Scriptures  that  he  was  thus  to  rise.  What  Jesus 
had  said  to  them  of  his  rising  from  the  dead  on  the  third  day 
(^[att.  16:  21,  and  17:  22,  and  20:  19)  they  had  not  well  under- 
stood— at  least  it  had  not  been  lodged  in  their  minds  as  an  event 

fully   accepted  and   anticipated. After  these   discoveries,   not 

seeing  any  thing  more  to  be  done,  they  returned  home. 

11.  But  Mary  stood  without  at  the  sepulcher  weeping  : 
and  as  she  Avept,  she  stooped  down,  and  looked  into  the 
Bepulchcr, 

12.  And  seeth  two  angels  in  white  sitting,  the  one  at  the 


292  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  LT- 

head,  and  the  other  at  the  feet,  where  the  body  of  Jesus  had 
lain. 

13.  And  they  say  unto  her.  Woman,  Avhy  weepest  thou? 
She  saith  unto  them.  Because  they  have  taken  away  my 
Lord,  and  I  know  not  where  they  have  laid  him. 

1-1.  And  Avhen  she  had  thus  said,  she  turned  herself  hack, 
and  saw  Jesus  standing,  and  knew  not  that  it  was  Jesus. 

15.  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Woman,  why  weepest  thou? 
Avhom  seekest  thou?  She,  supposing  him  to  be  the  gard- 
ener, saith  unto  him,  Sir,  if  thou  have  borne  him  hence,  tell 
me  where  thou  hast  laid  him,  and  I  will  take  him  aAvay. 

16.  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  ]\Iary.  She  turned  herself,  and 
saith  unto  him,  Eabboni ;   which  is  to  say,  Master. 

17.  Jesus  saith  unto  her,  Touch  me  not;  for  I  am  not  yet 
ascended  to  my  Father  :  but  go  to  my  brethren,  and  say 
unto  them,  I  ascend  unto  my  Father,  and  your  Father;  and 
to  my  God,  and  your  God. 

18.  Mary  INIagdalene  came  and  told  the  disciples  that  she 
had  seen  the  Lord,  and  that  he  had  spoken  these  things  unto 
her. 

Mary's  loving  heart  holds  her  to  the  spot.  She  stands  by  the 
sepulcher  weeping.  She  knows  it  is  empty;  Peter  and  John  had 
both  reported  it  so  ;  hut  still  she  lingers,  and  now,  ahuost  uncon- 
sciously she  stoops  down  and  looks  in.  Lo !  there  are  two  angels 
in  white  sitting  one  at  the  head  and  the  other  at  the  feet  of  the 
very  place  where  the  body  of  her  Lord  had  lain.  What  minis- 
tries of  love  and  service  brought  them  down  from  their  home 
in  heaven  ?  Had  they  come  to  attend  the  risen  Jesus  ?  Was  it 
their  hands  that  disposed  in  so  orderly  a  manner  both  the  linen 

clothes  and  the  napkin  ? They  are  present  now,  in  the   true 

spirit  of  angelic  ministry,  to  comfort  Mary.  Just  here,  something 
moved  her  to  turn  and  look  behind — and  there  stood  Jesus  !  Her 
■weeping  eyes  and  agitated  spirit  failed  at  first  to  recognize  the 
well-known  form.  At  first  she  did  not  even  recognize  that  sym- 
pathizing voice,  inquiring  why  she  wept  and  Avhom  she  sought. 
Her  words  in  reply,  repeated  now  for  the  third  time,  show  that 
her  thoughts  are  still  upon  taking  away  that  precious  dead  body 
in  order  that  she  and  her  sisters  might  complete   their  ministry 

of  love  with  the  sweet  spices  brought  and  ready. At  first  Jesus 

accosted  her  by  the  term  "  Avoman  ;  "  but  neither  this  name  nor 
the  tones  of  his  voice  secured  recognition.  Kext,  he  said  "Mary." 
Oh,  how  often  had  she  heard  that  -vvell-remembered  voice  pro- 
nouncing her  own  name  and  carrying  Love's  electric  impulses  to 
her  heart.  She  could  not  fail  to  recognize  those  tones  of.  love. 
That,  said  she  in  her  thought,  is  my  own  Lord  and  Savior,  and  she 
instantly  responds — "  Rabboni  " — meaning  not  merely  "Master," 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CIIAr.  XX.  293 

hilt  "My  i\[;istcr."     No  better  word  could  have  been  chosen  for 

this  spontaneous  response  of  her  soul. Why  did  Jesus  say  to 

her  "Touch  me  not;  "  whereas  on  that  very  day  (according  to 
Matt.  28:  9)  "the  other  women  early  at  the  sepulcher  came 
and  held  him  by  the  feet  and  worshiped  him;"  and  a  few  days 
later  he  said  to  unbelieving  Thomas,  "  Keach  hither  thy  hand 
and  thrust  it  into  my  side"  ?  (v.  27). 1  doubt  if  any  conjec- 
ture of  value  can  be  made  to  account  for  the  diverse  attitude  of 
Jesus  in  these  several  cases.  Mary's  thought,  if  she  advanced  to 
embrace  him,  was  not  like  that  of  Thomas  to  satisfy  herself  of 
his  actual  resurrection.  Thomas  had  said  he  should  demand  this 
sort  of  evidence  ;  in  great  condescension  to  his  skepticism,  Jesus 
yielded  to  his  demand.     Why  he  forbade   ]\Iary's  embrace  is  not 

made  clear. The  construction  which  assumes  that  Mary  clasped 

(or  moved  to  clasp)  the  person  of  her  Lord,  and  that  he  bade  her 
not  detain  him,  is  not  favored  liy  the  Greek  word.  This  does 
not  mean  detain,  but  touch. '^  Whatever  interpretation  we  adopt 
should  at  least  assume  that  the  original  Avord  said  what  was 
meant — /.  e.  it  should  base  itself  upon  this  text  and  not  some 
other. 

The  words  in  which  he  would  have  his  approaching  ascension 
to  the  Father  announced  to  his  disciples  must  strike  every  reader 
as  inimitably  tender  and  inspiring:  "  I  ascend  unto  my  Father 
and  your  Father" — to  one  who  is  at  once  both  my  Father  and 
yours;  yours  as  truly  as  mine.  So  you  may  think  of  him — your 
own  Father  as  well  as  the  Father  of  j^our  elder  Brother,  the  Jesus 
whom  you  have  followed  and  loved  through  the  daj's  of  his  humil- 
iation. 

19.  Then  the  same  day  at  evening,  being  the  first  day  of 
the  'week,  "when  the  doors  were  shut  where  the  disciples  were 
assembled  for  fear  of  the  Jews,  came  Jesus  and  stood  in  the 
midst,  and  saith  unto  tliem.  Peace  he  unto  you. 

20.  And  Avhen  he  had  so  said,  lie  shewed  unto  them  liU 
hands  and  his  side.  Tlien  were  the  disciples  ghid,  wlien  they 
saw  the  Lord. 

To  the  disciples  as  a  family,  this  was  the  first  appearance  of 
the  risen  Jesus. As  bearing  upon  the  nature  of  his  resurrec- 
tion body  there  has  been  no  little  speculation  upon  this  sudden 
appearance  in  the  midst  of  a  group  sitting  with  closed  doors.  The 
question  has  been  virtually  put — Was  his  raised  body  so  r/)nnate- 

rial  that  closed  doors  were  no  obstacle  to  his  entrance  ? But  it 

were  well  to  raise  the  previous  question — Has  John's  allusion  to 
the  "closed  doors"  the  least  reference  to  the  manner  of  the  Lord's 
entrance  into  the  room  ?  Was  it  in  his  thought  to  suggest  that 
Christ's  body  was  of  such  a  nature  that  it  could  and  did  enter  de- 
spite of  the  shut  doors  ?     Or,  was  it  not  rather  his  purpose  to  rep- 


294  GOSrEL  OF  JOIIN.— CIIAP.  XX. 

resent  this  as  a  private  meeting  of  the  disciples,  convened  in  this 
secluded  way  through  fear  of  violent  persecution  ?  The  circum- 
stance that  Jesus  "  came  and  stood  "  certainly  favors  the  idea  of 
a  material  body.  We  may  admit  a  mild  form  of  miracle — sup- 
pose in  opening  the  doors  unobserved,  or  in  holding  the  senses  of 
the  disciples  that  they  should  not  perceive  how  he  entered ;  but 
the  assumption  that  his  body  was  in  such  a  sense  spiritual  that 
closed  doors  were  no  barrier  to  his  entrance  should  have  more  ev- 
idence than  this  narrative  affords. That  "  he  showed  them  his 

hands  and  his  feet" — Avhere  the  nails  were  driven  through — was 
beyond  all  doubt  designed  to  convince  them  that  this  was  the  same 
body  which  was  nailed  to  the  cross.  Whatever  changes  it  had 
undergone  in  the  resurrection,  it  had  not  ceased  to  be  a  material 
body ;  it  was  in  some  vital  sense  the  same  body.  Its  laws  of  be- 
ing, as  to  sustenance,  sleep,  fatigue  and  rest,  disease,  frailty, 
temptability,  etc.,  etc.,  may  have  been — indeed,  seem  to  have 
been — greatly  changed;  but  the  precise  extent  of  these  changes 
and  the  nature  of  hothj  after  such  change — how  can  we  know  till 
our  experience  iu  the  risen  glorified  body  of  the  saints  shall  re- 
veal it? 

When  Jesus  broke  thus  suddenly  upon  their  astonished  vision, 
his  words  of  salutation  were  inexpressibly  cheering.  What 
could  have  been  more  so?  I  am  your  old,  your  long-tried  Friend. 
You  will  remember  my  words  while  yet  present  with  you,  say- 
ing, "  Peace  I  leave  with  you ;  my  peace  I  give  unto  you  :  not  as 
the  Avorld  giveth,  give  I  unto  you."  I  come  now  to  reiterate  the 
same  assurances ;  to  reaffirm  the  same  benedictions.  Oh,  wei'S 
they  not  glad  when  they  saw  the  Lord,  and  had  such  proofs  of 
his  true  identity — such  assurances  that  this  was  verily,  most  cer- 
tainly, their  own  precious  Redeemer  ! 

21.  Then  said  Jesus  to  tliem  again,  Peace  he  unto  you: 
as  my  Father  hath  sent  nie,  even  so  send  I  you. 

22.  And  when  he  had  said  this,  he  breathed  on  them,  and 
saith  unto  them,  Eeceive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost : 

23.  Whosesoever  sins  ye  remit  they  are  remitted  unto 
them;  and  whosesoever  s'lm  ye  retain,  they  are  retained. 

He  repeats  the  tender  words,  his  salutation  of  peace,  adding — 
I  send  you  forth  on  your  gospel  mission  as  my  Father  sent  me. 
Ye  are  to  take  up  and  prosecute  the  same  work  for  which  the 
Father  sent  me  into  the  world.  This  also  was  adapted  at  once  to 
cheer  their  hearts,  to  brace  up  their  courage,  to  inspire  an  undy- 
ing zeal,  and  to  impress  a  sense  of  great  responsibility.  But  how 
sweetly  the  sense  of  such  responsibility  must  have  rested  upon 
their  souls  accompanied  with  such  inspiring  consolations;  en- 
ff)rced  by  such  claims ;  associated  with  such  heavenly  fellow- 
ship ;  quickened  by  such  assurances  of  final  reward ! 

"Breathed  on  them,  saying.  Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost" — a 
symbolic  act,  based  on  the  analogy  between  breath  and  spirit,  and 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XX.  295 

indicating  that  he  now  began  to  fulfill  to  them  the  great  promise 
made  so  prominent  in  his  last  conversations  before  Gethsemane — 
that  he  Avould  give  them  "  another  Comforter,  the  Spirit  of  truth, 
who  sliould  lead  them  into  all  truth." 

"  Whosesoever  sins  ye  remit,  they  are  remitted,"  etc.  The  inter- 
pi'etation  of  these  Avords,  it  must  be  conceded,  involves  somewhat 
grave  difficulties,  and  moreover  is  so  important  as  to  justify 
thorough  and  if  need  be  extefided  examination. 

Let  it  be  noted,  they  are  not  introduced  with  the  declaration — - 
"All  power  is  given  unto  you  in  heaven  and  on  earth ;  "  the  ad- 
ministration of  government  and  pardon  under  the  scheme  of  re- 
demption is  transferred  absolutely  to  your  hands: — not  in  any 
such  connection  do  these  AVords  stand.  There  is  no  intimation 
that  they  were  designed  to  suspend  or  materially  modify  the  doc- 
trine— "  Who  can  forgive  sins  but  God  only  ?  "  "  The  Son  of 
man  hath  power  on  earth  to  forgive  sins."  If  this  view  be  cor- 
rect, this  must  be  one  of  our  land-marks  to  guide  us  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  passage. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  suggest  also  that  in  the  nature  of  the 
case,  the  real  remission  of  sins  must  assume  these  two  antece- 
dent conditions  in  the  pardoning  power — (1)  The  prerogatiA^e  of 
supreme  authority  under  God's  moral  government: — (2)  A 
knoAA'ledge  of  human  hearts,  scarcely  if  at  all  less  than  omnis- 
cient— at  least  sufficient  to  determine  with  unerring  certainty  the 
sincerity  of  repentance  and  of  gospel  faith  in  Jesus  the  Savior. 
These  qualifications  are  simply  indispensable.  It  can  not  for  a 
moment  be  supposed  that  God  Avill  transfer  the  power  or  the 
right  to  forgive  sins  to  any  party  in  heaven  or  on  earth  in  AA'hom 
tliese  conditions  are  not  met. 

Advancing  noAv  to  the  simple  question  of  interpretation — What 
do  these  ivords  mean  f  let  it  be  noted,  th'ey  stand  in  immediate 
connection  with  the  promise,  or  more  strictly  the  gift  of  the 
Spirit.  This  gift  w^ould  prepare  them  for  the  function  of  remit- 
ting sins,  whatever  this  precise  function  as  here  intended  might 

be. It  is  germain  therefore  to  our  present  chief  inquiry  to  ask 

— Was  the  Spirit  promised  and  given  to  enable  the  apostles  to 
administer  God's  moral  gOA'ernment;  or  rather,  only  to  publish 
its  principles  and  their  bearings  ?  Was  it  to  give  them  the 
power  to  know  human  hearts  unerringly  ;  or  simply  the  poAver  to 
tell  men  how  God  Avould  note  their  moral  attitude  toward  him- 
self forgiving  the  penitent  and  the  believing,  but  condemning  to 
deeper  Avoe  those  Avho  under  the  gospel  remained  still  impeni- 
tent  and  unbelieving? Fortunately   we  have  in  the  historic 

facts  of  the  case  the  key  to  the  interpretation  Ave  seek.  When 
the  Holy  Ghost  came  mightily  upon  the  apostles,  Peter — very 
much  a  representative  man  among  them — proclaimed  every- 
Avhere,  in  the  temple,  and  before  the  Great  Council — not  "I  ab- 
solve: "  not — Ave,  ajiostles,  are  commissioned  to  absolve  from  sin, 
or  to  retain  men's  sins  unpardoned  upon  their  guilty  souls  unto 
their  eternal  damnation — but  rather  on  this  wise:  "Repent  ye, 


296  GOSPEL  OF   JOHN.— CHAP.  XX. 

for  the  remission  of  your  sins"  (Acts  2:  38);  "  Eepcnt  and  be 
converted,  that  your  sins  may  be  blotted  out  "  (Acts  3  :  19)  ;  "  Him 
[Jesus]  hath  God  exalted  Avith  his  right  hand  to  be  a  Prince  and 
a  Savior,  yb?'  to  give  repentance  to  Israel  &.x\(\.  forgiveness  of  sins, 
and  we  [apostles]  are  his  vritnesses  of  these  things,  and  so  is  also 
the  Holy  Ghost"  (Acts  5:  31,  32).  Here  we  have  it  precisely. 
Jesus,  and  he  only,  gives  repentance  and  forgiveness  of  sins. 
We,  his  apostles,  are  only  his  witne'sses  as  to  this  thing.  We  tes- 
tifij  ;  Ave  announce;  aa'C  proclaim  this  great  truth  and  tell  men 
how  it  must  apply  to  their  sinning  souls.  In  this  sense,  and  in 
this  only,  do  we,  the  apostles  of  Jesus,  remit  or  retain  men's  sins. 

To   some  it  may  seem  superfluous  to  j^ress  this  argument 

from  actual  history.  Jt  Avould  perhaps  be  so  if  the  subject  itself 
Avere  not  so  vital,  and  the  errors  made  in  it  so  graA'e — if  Rome 
had  not  built  upon  it  her  immense  system  of  forgivenesses  of  sins 
past,  and  indulgences  for  sins  future;  and  if  Protestants  had  not 
labored  long  and  immensely  to  find  some  middle  ground,  a  little 
short  of  plenary  forgiveness,  administered  by  preacher  or  pope, 
yet  quite  beyond  declaring,  preaching,  forgiveness  by  and  through 

Christ  alone. Let  the  argument  from  history  then  be  closed  by 

a  reference  to  the  case  of  Peter  dealing  Avith  Simon  Magus — in 
Avhich  Peter,  holding  the  keys,  did  not,  by  and  of  himself,  absolve 
the  trembling  Magus,  but  said — "  Repent  therefore  of  this  thy 
Avickedness,  and  pray  God  if  perhaps  the  thought  of  thy  heart 
may  be  forgiven  thee"  (Acts  8:  22). 

But  it  Avill  probably  be  said — These  words  of  Jesus  are  per- 
fectly jilain  and  explicit;  also  that  the  interpretation  1  have  sug- 
gested rather  interprets  their  obvious  sense  out  of  them  than  de- 
velops the  sense  that  must  be  in  them. 

This  objection  should  be  fairly  met.  I  reply  to  it  that  the  most 
obvious  sense  of  Avords  is  not  always  the  true  sense,  and  that  pe- 
culiar constructions  are  in  some  cases  demanded  by  knoAvn  usage. 
For  similar  usage  to  this  above  suggested  I  refer  to  an  analogous 
case.  When  the  Lord  would  commission  Jeremiah  as  his  j^i'ophet 
— as  Jesus  here  commissions  the  disciples  as  his  gospel  preach- 
ers— Jeremiah  reports  the  transaction  thus:  "The  Lord  put  forth 
his  hand  and  touched  my  mouth"  [a  symbol  quite  analogous  to 
"  breathing  on  the  disciples  to  impart  the  Holy  Ghost"  ],  "  and  the 
Lord  said  unto  me — Behold,  i  have  put  my  Avords  into  thy  mouth. 
See,  I  have  this  day  set  thee  over  the  nations  and  over  the  king- 
doms, to  root  out  and  to  pull  down,  and  to  destroy  and  to  throAV 
down,  to  build  and  to  plant."  This,  it  will  be  noted,  is  perfectly 
plain  and  explicit.  Jeremiah  is  to  destroy  kingdoms,  and  to  plant 
and  build  up  kingdoms.  Nay,  more;  the  Lord  declares — "I  haA'e 
this  day  set  thee  OA'er  the  nations  and  over  the  kingdoms"  for 
this  very  purpose.  But  what  is  the  true  sense  of  these  Avords  ? 
Is  it  that  Jeremiah  Avas  really  made  God's  A'icegerent  with  all 
poAver  on  earth  to  do  these  things  in  very  deed — by  his  OAvn  right 
arm  ?  Not  at  all.  This  language  means  only  that  he  Avas  to  j9;-c- 
dict  from  the  mouth  of  the  Lord  what  the  Lord  himself  would 


GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CILVr.  XX.  297 

do.     lie   was  only  a  prophct-prcaclicr ;  not  an  executive  officer 

armed  with  omnipotence. Here  let  it  be  noted  that  this  mode 

of  presenting  such  a  thought  was  not  unfamiliar  to  Hebrew  ears. 
Jesus  is  here  speaking  to  Heljrew  men;  Old  Testament-reading 
men  ;  and  therefore  could  safely  follow  Hebrew  usage  with  no 
special  liability  of  being  misunderstood  by  them.  Moreover,  as 
said  already,  his  words  thus  interpreted  give  us  what  became  act- 
ual fact  in  their  history  ;  but  if  interpreted  in  the  sense  of  con- 
ferring plenary  power  to  absolve  or  condemn,  who  can  show  that 
history  fulfills  such  a  sense? 

Allusion  has  been  made  to  the  fact  that  certain  Protestant  in- 
terpreters have  sought  to  find  some  middle  ground  between  that 
of  the  Komanist,  and  that,  say,  of  Jeremiah's  usage,  given  above. 
Thus  Alford  on  this  text :  "  ^y  this  passage  authority  to  discern 
spirits  and  pronounce  on  them  is  reassured  (see  Matt.  18:  18); 
also  (it  is  plain  from  Luke  24:  45)  a  discerning  of  the  mind  of 
the  Spirit  is  given  them." xis  to  i\\Q  j^i'cscnt  meaning  and  ap- 
plication of  these  words  he  says: — "  The  words  closely  considered 
amount  to  this — that  with  the  gift  and  real  participation  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  come  the  conviction  and  therefore  the  knowledge  of 
sin,  of  righteousness,  and  of  judgment;  and  this  knowledge  be- 
comes more  j^erfect,  the  more  men  arc  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost. 
Since  this  is  so,  they  who  are  pre-eminently  filled  with  his  pres- 
ence are  pre-eminently  gifted  with  the  discernment  of  sin  and  re- 
pentance in  others ;  and  hence  by  ilie  Lord's  appointment  au- 
thorized to  pronounce  piardon  of  sin  and  the  contrary."  [The 
Italics  are  his].  "The  apostles  had  this  in  a  special  manner,  and 
by  the  full  indwelling  of  the  Spirit  were  enabled  to  discern  the 
hearts  of  men  and  to  give  sentence  on  that  discernment.  And 
this  gift  belongs  to  the  church  in  all  ages,  especially  to  those  who 
by  legitimate  appointment  are  set  to  minister  in  the  church  of 
Christ,"  etc. 

Ellicott  (as  we  should  expect)  has  a  more  just  sense  of  the  dif- 
ficulties of  the  passage.  He  limits  himself  in  his  text  (Life  of 
Christ,  pp.  360,  361)  to  the  remark  that  "the  mysterious  power 
of  binding  and  loosing  was  conferred  upon  the  inspired  and  anew 
accredited  apostles;'  and  in  his  note  adds — "The  mysterious 
power  now  given  to  the  apostles  was  an  essential  adjunct  to  their 
office  as  the  ambassadors  of  Christ,  and  more  especially  as  the 
rulers  of  his  church.  It  had  reference  (as  Meyer  rightly  ob- 
serves) not  merely  to  the  general  power  of  receiving  into  the 
church  or  the  contrary,  but  to  their  disciplinary  power  over  indi- 
vidual members  of  it,  both  in  the  respect  to  the  retaining  and  the 
absolving  of  sins."  [But  let  us  arrest  ciuotations  and  ask — Does 
Christ  certainly  save  all  whom  the  church  receives  into  her  fel- 
lowship, and  not  save  whom  she  does  not  receive  ?  Is  her  decis- 
ion upon  cases  of  disciiiline  certainly  ratified  by  Jesus,  and  is 
this  the  doctrine  of  our  passage?  If  so,  then  Rome  is  right,  and 
the  decisions  of  Christian  churches  and  ministers  upon  individ- 
ual piety  is  final  before  the  court  of  heaven  !  ] 


298  GOsrEL  OF  johx.— chap.  XX. 

Olshausen  holds  that  men  full  of  the  Spirit  have  this  power  o'^ 
absolving  and  retaining;  they  only,  and  only  those  when  so 
filled.  He  saj-s — "With  the  possession  of  the  Spirit  was  con- 
nected the  jjower  of  forgiving  sins  and  that  of  not  forgiving,  i.  e. 
of  retaining  them,  for  in  his  nature  lie  the  conditions  through 
which  alone  such  power  becomes  explicable  and  secured  against 
abuse." 

Tholuck  scarcely  grapples  with  the  main  question,  yet  says — 
"Only  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost  can  a  judgment  be 
formed  as  to  the  moral  position  of  men  and  its  relations  to  the 
kingdom  of  God  :  so  far  the  promise  in  v.  22  is  connected  with  tliat 
inv.  23.  This  judgment  of  the  Spirit,  however,  is  not  an  indistinct 
emotion,  but  is  connected  with  the  rule  of  faith  and  life;  so  far 
the  jus  clavium — 'the  power  of  the  keys,'  is,  in  the  later  church, 
a  right  of  the  clergy." 

Doddridge,  most  judicious  among  them  all — thus:  "I  will  soon 
give  you  the  Spirit  in  great  fullness  to  qualify  and  furnish  you 
for  your  important  office,  in  consequence  of  which  whosesoever  sins 
ye  shall  remit,  or  shall  declare  to  he  forgiven,  they  shall  be  re- 
mitted," etc.;  "shall  retain,  or pronotmce  to  be  un2^cirdoned,  etc.;  for 
ye  shall  have  a  power  not  only  of  declaring  what  shall  be  lawful 
or  unlawful  under  the  gospel  dispensation,  but  also  of  sending  or 
removing  miraculous  punishments,  and  discerning  the  spirits  of 
men  in  such  perfection  as  to  be  able  wath  certainty  to  declare  to 
particular  persons  wdiether  they  be  or  be  not  in  a  state  of  pardon 
and  acceptance  with  God." 

The  careful  reader  of  the  above  comments  on  this  passage  will 
see  that  commentators  fall  naturally  into  three  classes  on  a  rising 
scale,  thus: — {a.)  Those  Avho  understand  the  functions  of  the 
apostles  to  be  simply  declarative — preaching  salvation  for  believ- 
ers ;  condemnation  for  unbelievers ; — tersely  expressed  in  other 
form — "  He  that  believeth  shall  be  saved,  and  he  that  believeth  not 
shall  be  damned."  In  yet  other  words  they  were  commissioned 
to  proclaim  to  lost  men  the  principles  of  the  gospel  system,  so 
that  they  might  undei'stand  ichose  sins  should  be  remitted  and 
whose  retained. 

(b.)  Those  who  would  add  to  this  function  of  declaring,  the 
power  of  discerning  spirits — i.  e.  of  reading  moral  character — so 
as  to  be  able  to  judge  who  is  penitent  and  believing,  and  who  is 
not;  coupled  with  the  doctrine  that  Jesus  pledges  himself  to 
ratify  and  confirm  their  judgment. 

(c.)  Those  who  add  one  element  more,  viz:  antliority,  acting  in 
the  place  of  God,  to  remit — absolve — men's  sins;  or  to  retain  and 
bind — i.  e.  condemn. This  is  an  advance  upon  the  next  pre- 
ceding, inasmuch  as  it  is  more  to  pass  the  sentence  than  it  is 
simply  to  know  how  it  should  and  will  be  passed  by  the  Supreme 
Ruler. 

It  is  noticeable  that  a  large  class  of  writers  lay  out  their 
strength  to  sustain  the  second  grade  of  opinions,  i.  e.  to  show 
that  gospel  preachers,  and  churches,  acting  officially,  ma^''  be  so 


GOsrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XX.  299 

full}-  taught  of  the  Spirit  as  to  judge  correctly  upon  the  c^uestion 

of  another's  personal  piety. In  general  this  may  be  conceded 

to  be  true;  but  the  further  question  Avill  yet  remain — Does  Jesus 
jiledge  himself  to  indorse  their  decision  ?  Does  he  ever  promise 
to  make  those  decisions  infolliblc  ?  And  then  there  is  the  j-et 
further  question:  Docs  he  delegate  to  his  disciples  the  authority 
to  pardon  or  not  pai'don  sin  according  to  their  own  judgment  of 

the  case? For  plainly,  if  wc  must   take  the   -words   in   their 

most  obvious  sense,  they  will  carry  us  quite  beyond  the  discerning 
of  spirits  (reading  men's  hearts),  to  the  higlier  function  of  ap- 
plying this  knowledge  by  really  passing  sentence  of  acquittal  or  of 
condemnation.  If  we  recoil  from  the  latter  as  abhorrent  to  both 
Scripture  and  i-eason,  what  do  we  gain  by  holding  on  to  the  power 
of  judging  infallibly  ? 

In  my  view  the  only  safe  construction  is  the  first  above  named — 
the  responsibility  oi  declaring  the  jyincqjles  on  Avhich  men's  sins 
are  forgiven  or  not  forgiven — principles  which  God  will  indorse 
for  evermore;  upon  which  he  will  certainly  act  in  his  final  judg- 
ment upon  all  the  race  according  to  deeds  done  in  the  bod3^ 

24.  But  Thomas,  one  of  the  twelve,  called  Didvmus,  was 
not  with  them  when  Jesus  came. 

25.  The  other  discijiles  therefore  said  unto  him,  AVe  have 
seeil  the  Lord.  But  he  said  unto  them,  Except  I  shall  see 
in  his  hands  tlie  print  of  the  nails,  and  put  my  finger  into 
the  print  of  the  nails,  and  thrust  my  hand  into  his  side,  I 
w  ill  not  believe. 

In  that  eventful  meeting  Thomas  was  absent.  Probably  his 
proclivity  toward  doubt  occasioned  this  absence.  He  may  have 
almost  given  up  the  hope  of  any  thing  to  purpose  in  the  future 
of   the   gospel   enterprise.     Jesus   was    dead :    what   could  they 

now? When  the  other  disciples  met  him  next  they  told  him 

the  news  which  had  so  gladdened  their  souls.  They  found  him 
very  skeptical.  He  would  take  no  testimony  short  of  the  senses, 
and  of  no  man's  senses  save  his  own.  And  he  must  have  not 
only  sight,  but  feeling— must  not  only  see  in  those  hands  the 
prints  of  the  nails,  but  put  his  veiy  finger  into  those  nail-prints 
and  thrust  his  hand  into  the  wounded  side.  This  evidence  Avould 
identify  the  risen  body  to  his  satisfaction;  nothing  less  should. 

It  was  long  ago  said — Under  God's  good  providence,  Thomas 

doubted  that  we  might  not  doubt;  his  skepticism  suffices  for  all 
future  skeptics  Avho  are  really  honest — should  be  the  panacea  for 
all  subsequent  doubting  as  to  the  actual  resui'rection  of  the  Cru- 
cified One. 

26.  And  after  eight  days  again  his  disciples  were  within, 
and  Thomas  was  Avith  them:  then  came  Jesus,  the  doors 
being  shut,  and  stood  in  the  midst,  and  said.  Peace  be  unto 
you. 


300  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XX. 

27.  Then  saith  he  to  Thomas,  Reach  hitlier  thy  finger, 
and  behold  my  hands;  and  reach  hither  thy  hand,  and 
thrust  it  into  my  side,  and  be  not  faithless,  but  believing. 

28.  And  Thomas  answered  and  said  unto  him,  JNIy  Lord 
and  my  God. 

29.  Jesus  saith  unto  him,  Thomas,  because  thou  hast  seen 
me,  thou  hast  believed:  blessed  cire  they  that  have  not  seen, 
and  yet  have  believed. 

When  the  prayer  meethig  of  the  next  Lord's  day  evening 
came  round,  Thomas  was  there;  and  again,  as  before,  .Jesus  came, 
and  with  the  same  benediction.  Then  he  turned  to  Thomas.  He 
knew  what  Thomas  had  said,  and  very  graciously,  instead  of  re- 
buking him,  calls  him  up  as  near  as  he  could  Avish,  to  see  with 
his  own  eyes  and  to  feel  with  finger  and  hand,  just  as  he  had 
said  he  must  before  he  could  believe,  adding,  hoAvever,  this 
caution: — "Be  not  faithless,  but  believing."  The  judgment  and 
the  heart  of  Thomas  are  alike  carried.  He  believes  and  he  wor- 
ships! "My  Lord,"  cries  he,  "and  my  God!"  Oh,  my  Jesus,  all 
divine  art  Thou,  and  I  adore  Thee  as  Supreme  Lord  of  all — my 
very  God ! — — It  would  be  a  gross  outrage  upon  believing,  peni- 
tent Thomas  to  put  these  words  of  his  into  the  category  of  pro- 
fane exclamations — as  if  he  could  use  such  words  as  the  mere 
utterance  of  surprise,  astonishment.  And  it  would  be  no  less  an 
outrage  upon  the  purity  of  Jesus  to  assvime  that  he  would  proceed 
forthwith  to  bless  Thomas  for  profane  swearing !  No  one  can 
question  that  Jesus  undei'stood  the  meaning  of  Thomas  and  knew 
his  heart — knew  whether  these  were  the  solemn  convictions  of  his 
soul,  or  the  thoughtless,  profane  words  of  a  loose  tongue,  accus- 
tomed to  take  the  name  of  God  in  vain. 

While  Jesus  does  not  rebuke  Thomas  directly,  he  gently  sug- 
gests that  those  who  believe  Avithout  the  evidence  of  their  own 
senses  will  be  yet  more  blessed. 

30.  And  many  other  signs  truly  did  Je.«us  in  the  presence 
of  his  disciples,  which  are  not  written  in  this  book : 

31.  But  these  are  written,  that  ye  might  believe  that  Jesus 
is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God;  and  that  believing  ye  might 
have  life  through  his  name. 

Several  critics  (German  more  especially)  maintain  very  strenu- 
ously that  these  are  the  last  words  that  John  wrote  in  this  gospel 
history;  and  that  chap.  21  is  spurious — Avritten  at  some  later  pe- 
riod and  by  some  unknoAvn  liand. It  can  not  and  need  not  be 

denied  that  these  verses  have  the  appearance  of  a  close,  being  a 
natural  and  appropriate  ending.  The  author  takes  a  comprehen- 
sive survey  of  what  he  has  written ;  says  there  were  many  other 
incideiats  of  like  character,  not  included  here,  and  gives  his  rea- 
sons for  his  selection.     We  may  suppose  that  John  did  close  here. 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XXI.  301 

in  precisely  this  way ;  but  at  a  later  period,  for  special  reasons, 
not  certainly  known  to  us,  added  this  chap.  21  as  an  appendix. 
Mis  greatly  prolonged  life  afforded  him  the  opportunity  for  this. 
It  has  been  suggested  with  some  plausibility  that  he  wrote  it 
mainly  to  withstand  the  tradition  to  which  he  refers  (v.  23)  that 
this  beloved  disciple  (John)  "  should  not  die."  It  were  better  to 
quash  such  a  tradition  by  a  full  statement  of  the  circumstances 
which  gave  rise  to  it  than  to  let  it  run  till  his  actual  death  should 
disprove  it — with  staggering  effect  upon  those  Avho  had  accepted 
it  as  the  word  of  the  Lord. 

"  8igns"  in  the  sense  of  miracles — implying  that  miracles  were 
tiie  staple  themes  of  the  book.  If  Ave  include,  with  the  narratives 
which  record  the  miracles,  the  conversations  and  discussions  of 
the  Lord  connected  therewith,  we  shall  find  that  a  large  part  of 
the  book  comes  under  this  description. 

The  object  of  this  book  as  here  given  has  come  under  consid- 
eration already  in  the  Introduction.  It  is  scarcely  necessary 
therefore  to  say  here  that  his  object  was  to  set  forth  the  JNIessiah- 
ship  and  Sonship  of  Jesus,  and  this  for  the  twofold  purpose — 
first,  of  inducing  men  to  believe  these  facts,  and  next,  that  through 
such  believing,  they  might  find  that  spiritual  life  which  such  be- 
lief, honestly  held  and  allowed  to  develop  its  legitimate  influence, 
will  assuredly  give.  No  aim  could  be  more  noble  ;  no  results 
more  precious.     Let  us  be  forever  grateful  to  God  for  this  book ! 


CHAPTER    XXI. 

This  appendix  details  somewhat  minutely  a  third  appearance 
of  the  risen  Jesus — viz.  to  seven  of  his  discijdes  (those  of  the  fish- 
ermen class)  at  the  sea  of  Tiberias  (vs.  1-14);  then  a  conversa- 
tion of  Jesus  with  Peter  (vs.  15-19);  followed  by  a  suggested 
conversation  between  the  same  parties  respecting  John  (vs.  20- 
24) ;  closing  with  the  author's  identification  of  himself  and  his 
concluding  remarks  as  to  the  number  of  the  Lord's  notable  deeds 
(vs.  24,  25). 

1.  After  these  things  Je?us  shewed  himself  again  to  the 
disciples  at  the  sea  of  Tiberias ;  and  on  this  wise  shewed  he 
himself. 

2.  There  were  together  Simon  Peter,  and  Thomas  called 
Didymus,  and  Nathanael  of  Cana  in  Galilee,  and  the  sons 
of  Zebedee,  and  two  other  of  his  disciples. 

3.  Simon  Peter  saith  unto  them,  I  go  a  fishing.  They 
say  inito  him,  AVe  also  go  with  thee.     They  went  forth,  and 


302  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XXI. 

entered  into  a  ship  immediately ;  and  that  niglit  tlicy  caught 
nothing. 

4.  But  when  the  morning  was  now  come,  Jesus  stood  on 
the  shore ;  but  the  disciples  knew  not  that  it  was  Jesus. 

The  impulse  which  moved  Peter  to  lead  off  in  this  fishing  ex- 
cursion is  not  even  hinted — whether  it  were  recreation,  pleasant 
reminiscences  of  former  pursuits,  subsistence,  or  spare  time  not 
otherwise  filled.      It  does  not   appear  that  the  Lord  rebuked  the 

movement. One   toiling   night  brought  them  no  fish.     In  the 

morning  Jesus  stood  on  the  shore,  within  speaking  distance,  yet 
not  recognized.  We  might  suggest  supposable  reasons  for  this 
non-recognition,  but  they  would  be  only  suppositions. 

5.  Then  Jesus  saith  unto  them,  Children,  have  ye  any 
meat  ?     They  answered  him.  No. 

6.  And  he  said  unto  them,  Cast  the  net  on  the  right  side 
of  the  ship,  and  ye  shall  find.  They  cast  therefore,  and 
now  they  were  not  able  to  draw  it  for  the  multitude  of  fishes. 

7.  Therefore  that  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved  saith  unto 
Peter,  It  is  the  Lord.  Now  when  Simon  Peter  heard  that 
it  was  the  Lord,  he  girt  his  fisher's  coat  unto  him,  (for  he 
was  naked,)  and  did  cast  himself  into  the  sea. 

8.  And  the  other  disciples  came  in  a  little  ship,  (for  they 
Avere  not  far  from  land,  but  as  it  were  two  hundred  cubits,) 
dragging  the  net  with  fishes. 

The  precision  of  the  Greek  langiitige  appears  in  this  question 
(v.  5)  translated — "Have  ye  any  meat?  "  In  Greek  the  question 
is  put  by  a  word  which  is  at  once  an  interrogative  and  a  nega- 
tive— the  negative  referring  to  the  thought  or  supposition  of  the 
questioner:    thus — Children,   ye   have  not   any  food   here,   have 

you  ?     The  word  implies  that  Jesus  assumes  they  have  none. 

This  immense  draught  of  fishes  seiwed  to  flash  it  upon  the  mind 
of  John  that  the  man  who  told  them  -where  to  find,  vras  their  OAvn 
Lord  Jesus.  lie  whispers  this  to  Peter.  Quick  as  thought  Peter 
girds  about  him  his  fisher's  coat  (in  respect  for  the  Blessed  One) 
and  dashes  into  the  sea  to  meet  his  Lord.  How  like  Peter!  The 
other  disciples  (Peter  excepted)  come — not  in  a  little  ship,  as  if 
it  might  be  some  other  little  ship,  coming  to  their  help — but  in 
the  little  ship — the  same  in  which  they  had  been  fishing  all  night 
— dragging  their  burden. 

9.  As  soon  then  as  they  were  come  to  land,  they  saw  a 
fire  of  coals  there,  and  fish  laid  thereon,  and  bread. 

10.  Jesus  saith  unto  them,  Bring  of  the  fish  which  ye 
have  now  caught. 

IL  Simon  Peter  vrent  up,  and  drew  the  net  to  land  full 


GOsrEL  OF  joiix.— ciLvr.  XXI.  303 

of  great  fishes,  a  liundred  and  fifty  and  three  ;  and  for  all 
there  were  so  many,  yet  was  not  the  net  broken. 

The  fire  of  coals  prepared,  with  fish  and  bread  in  readiness, 
suggest  that  Jesus,  with  his  own  hand,  or  by  miracle,  or  by 
means  of  other  helpers,  had  been  making  provision  for  their 
meal. Simon,  now  on  shore,  was  ready  to  lend  a  hand  in  haul- 
ing up  this  draught  of  fishes. This  great  success   must   have 

been  sweetly  suggestive  of  the  promise — "I  will  make  you  fish- 
ers of  men."  Ye  shall  know  the  difi'erence  it  makes  to  have  the 
presence  of  your  Lord,  and  may  estimate  the  blessedness  of  hav- 
ing him  "  ahvaj's  icllh  you  even  to  the  end  of  the  world." 

12.  Jesus  saith  unto  them,  Come  and  dhie.  And  none 
of  the  disciples  durst  ask  him,  Who  art  thou  ?  knowing  that 
it  was  the  Lord. 

13.  Jesus  then  cometli,  and  taketh  bread,  and  giveth  them, 
and  fish  likewise. 

14.  This  is  now  the  third  time  that  Jesus  shewed  himself 
to  his  disciples,  after  that  he  was  risen  from  the  dead. 

No  one  dared  ask  him,  Who  art  thou  ?  for  it  seemed  an  im- 
pertinence when  they  knew  so  well.  A  strange  feeling  of  pro- 
foundest  awe  seems  to  have  blended  with  tender  afiection  and 
fascinating  interest,  in  such  a  presence.  If  they  were  restrained 
from  saying  all  they  thought,  they  could  at  least  feel  most  in- 
tensely  and   rejoice   Avith    exceeding    great  joy. That    Jesus 

should  take  his  usual  place  at  the  head  of  the  table,  breaking 
bread  and  distributing  to  them  as  of  old,  was  indeed  (estimated 
from  Oriental  usage,  or  from  the  usages  of  any  people)  tenderly 
kind  and  assuring — a  precious  guaranty  of  undying  afiection. 

At  this  point  John  closes  his  record  of  the  appearances  of  Jesus 
risen,  to  his  disciples.  Let  us  revert,  briefly  as  possible,  to  the 
records  on  this  point  left  us  by  the  other  evangelists  and  by  Paul. 

Matthew  relates  two  instances:  (1)  His  appearance  to  Mary 
Magdalene  and  "the  other  Mary"  as  they  were  returning  from 
their  very  earfy  visit  to  the  sepulcher,  and  hastening  to  tell  the 
disciples  that  the  body  Avas  not  there  (28  ;  9). (2)  His  appear- 
ance to  the  eleven  on  a  mountain  in  Galilee  (28 :  16,  17). 

Mark  states  very  definitely  that  Jesus  appeared  first  to  Mary 
IMagdalene  (16:  9);  next  to  two  brethren  (not  of  the  eleven)  as 
they  went  into  the  country — the  same  (supposably)  which  Luke 
relates  much  more  fully  (24 :  13-35) ;  and  lastly,  to  the  eleven  as 
they  sat  at  meat  (16  :   14). 

Luke  narrates  at  some  length  the  very  early  visit  of  the  women 
to  the  empty  sepulcher;  how  they  saw  two  angels  in  human  form 
and  from  them  learned  that  Jesus  had  risen ;  but  Luke  does  not 
say  that  they  saw  the  Lord.  The  appearance  of  Jesus  to  the  two 
brethren  Avho  went  out  that  morning  to  Emmaus,  Luke  narrates 
minutely — how  Jesus  made  himself  knoAvn  to  them  as  they  were 


304  GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XXI. 

breaking  bread ;  rebuked  their  unbelief;  "  expounded  in  all  the 
Scriptures  the  things  concerning  himself;  "  and  ultimately  van- 
ished suddenly  from  their  sight.  Returning  at  once  to  Jerusalem, 
they  found  the  eleven  convened ;  learned  that  Jesus,  during  the 
day,  had  appeared  to  Peter,  and  had  begun  to  rehearse  their  own 
story — vshen,  lo !  Jesus  himself  came  into  the  midst  of  the  group. 
Luke,  therefore,  as  ilark  also,  recites  three  distinct  appear- 
ances— of  which  two  seem  to  be  identical — the  third  in  each  his- 
tory being  omitted  by  the  other  evangelist. 

John,  as  we  have  seen,  specifies  four  several  appearances. 

Paul  (1  Cor.  15  :  5-8)  makes  a  very  well  defined  list.— (1)  Seen 
]iy  Cephas  {i.  e.  Simon  Peter);  (2)  By  the  twelve  (perhaps  iden- 
tical with  his  appearing  on  the  first  Lord's  day  evening  to  the  ten) ; 
(3)  By  more  than  five  hundred  brethren  at  once  (supposed  to 
have  been  in  Galilee)  ;  (4)  r>y  James,  not  elsewhere  specified  ; 
(5)  By  all  the  apostles — probably  identical  with  the  last  appear- 
ance recorded  by  Luke;  (6)  Last  of  all,  by  Paul — which  must 
have  been  at  or  after  his  conversion,  and  in  either  case,  after 
Christ's  ascension. 

Grouping  together  some  thoughts  upon  these  various  records,  I 
suggest — 

1.  That  the  several  nai-rators  seem  to  have  Avritten  altogether 
independently  of  each  other.  No  one  copies  from  another;  no 
one  even  alludes  to  any  other;  nay  more — no  one  seems  to  have 
had  the  least  regard  for  making  his  statement  harmonize  with 
those  of  any  one"  of  his  brethren.  Consequently  they  are  inde- 
pendent Avitnesses. 

2.  Each  historian  seems  to  have  selected  those  cases  of  visible 
appearance  which  had  most  impressed  him,  or  with  which  he 
was  most  familiar,  or  which  seemed  to  him  most  important  for 
the  purposes  of  his  own  history.  Such  considerations  would  natur- 
ally have  force  upon  honest  minds.  Every  thing  indicates  the 
presence  and  control  of  such  considerations  in  their  case. 

3.  No  one  of  them  has  made  his  enumeration  exhaustive.  The 
presumption  is,  they  did  not  aim  to.  Paul's  list  is  more  full  than 
either  of  the  others,  and  presents  most  evidence  of  being  drawn 
up  to  jjrove  the  fact  of  Christ's  actual  resurrection.  Note  espe- 
cially the  case  of  his  being  seen  by  more  than  five  hundred  at 
once — many  of  whom  he  said  were  living  then — a  strong  circum- 
stance to  the  point  of  proof.  But  he  entirely  omits  the  appear- 
ances to  the  sisters  as  reported  by  the  other  historians.  It  is  ob- 
vious that  his  Corinthian  readers  would  lack  that  deep  social  in- 
terest which  made  the  manifestation  of  Jesus  to  those- sisters  so 
very  precious  to  the  disciples,  and  moreover  would  underrate  the 
value  of  their  testimony  to  the  great  historic  fact.  In  Corinth 
Christianity  had  not  then  elevated  woman  as  it  had  in  Judea 
and  Galilee. 

Luke  did  not  aim  to  make  his  enumeration  exhaustive,  for 
while  his  gospel  history  narrates  in  detail  but  two  cases,  alluding 
incidentally  to  a  third,   his  reference  to  the  subject  in  Acts  1 : 


GOSrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XXI.  305 

4 — "To  whom  ho  showed  himself  alive  after  his  passion  hy 
many  infallible  proofs,  being  seen  of  them  forty  days,  and  speak- 
ing to  them  of  the  things  pertaining  to  the  kingdom  of  God  " — 
implies  forcibly  that  he  knew  many  other  cases.  Indeed  this 
statement,  beyond  any  other  we  have,  indicates  that  Jesus  was 
often  present  among  his  followers  during  tliose  forty  days,  and 
strongly  suggests  that  all  our  records  combined  fail  to  be  ex- 
haustive. 

4.  The  prominence  given  by  the  four  evangelists  to  the  cases 
of  the  sisters — Mai-y  Magdalene  and  others — is  manifestly  due  to 
their  personal  character,  to  their  positive  agency,  and  to  the  high 
esteem  in  which  they  were  held  both  by  Jesus  and  by  the  whole 
brotherhood  of  disciples.  It  is  a  precious  tribute  to  the  influence 
of  Christianity  upon  woman,  and  to  the  services  rendered  by  re- 
deemed woman  to  that  Christianity  which  has  redeemed  her.  In 
giving  so  much  space  in  their  narratives  to  women  as  favored 
with  visions  of  the  risen  Jesus,  the  gosjiel  historians  were  think- 
ing less  of  making  up  judicial  testimony  to  the  fact  of  a  real  res- 
urrection, and  more,  of  doing  justice  to  the  deep  sympathy  and 
love  of  Jesus  for  them,  and  to  their  own  hearts'  love  for  Jesus. 
Let  us  be  thankful  for  such  facts — that  they  existed  then  and 
have  been  reproduced  in  every  age  of  a  living  Christianity — 
thankful  also  for  a  record  so  honest,  so  impartial,  so  rich  in  its 
testimony  to  the  high  appreciation  in  which  woman's  devotion  to 
her  Lord  was  held  by  the  earliest  Christian  brotherhood. 

5.  It  remains  to  say  that  taken  in  whole  the  recorded  testimony 
to  the  fact  of  Christ's  actual  resurrection  is  perfectly  conclusive. 
It  is  not  easy  to  see  how  a  fact  of  this  nature  could  be  more 

abundantly  substantiated. Of  course   the   fact  of   his   actual 

death  must  be  established — and  is  so,  beyond  the  remotest  possi- 
l)ility  of  mistake.  Of  this  point  there  is  no  occasion  to  treat 
here.  The  point  of  his  actual  resurrection  from  the  dead  must 
be  proved  substantially  as  we  have  seen  it  proved  in  these  records 
— by  his  visible  manifestations;  by  his  bodily  presence  shown  to 
mortal  ejes,  seen  by  living  men  and  women;  handled  by  human 
fingers ;  evinced  by  his  living  voice,  by  his  partaking  of  human 
food  with  and  before  them,  and  by  replacing  himself  in  his  for- 
mer relations  to  them  as  their  spiritual  Teacher,  their  sympa- 
thizing Friend,  their  own  Lord  and  Master. 

These  manifestations,  we  may  notice,  were  made,  not  to  men 
previously  committed  to  make  out  a  miracle  and  palm  it  off  upon 
the  world;  not  to  men  of  easy  credulity,  but  to  men  so  remote 
from  this  that  though  it  had  been  previously  foretold  repeatedly, 
they  could  not  accept  it  in  its  literal  sense,  did  not  understand, 
believe,  or  expect  it.  As  to  one  of  their  number,  we  are  defi- 
nitely told  he  would  believe  on  nothing  short  of  the  fullest  evi- 
dence of  sight  and  touch.  Again,  these  personal  appearances 
were  not  made  before  strangers  who  had  never  or  rarely  seen 
him  before,  but  to  those  who  had  known  him  best;  were  made 
not  once   only,  but  many  times ;  not  under  one  set  of  circum- 


306  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAr.  XXI. 

stances,  but  in  almost  every  possible  variety  of  circumstance — • 
during  open  day  and  in  the  evening;  -walking  by  the  way,  and 
also  sitting  around  the  table  at  meals;  in  the  city  and  in  the 
country  ;  in  Jerusalem,  on  Mount  Olivet,  and  on  a  mountain  in 
Galilee;  several  times  to  one  individual  only;  several  other  times 
to  the  assembled  group  of  the  eleven  ;  again  to  more  than  five 
hundred  brethren  at  once,  of  whom  Paul,  writing  to  the  Corin- 
thians, said — "  The  greater  part  remain  unto  this  present  [time], 
but  some  are  fallen  asletp."  The  living  witnesses  therefore  down 
to  that  day  (about  A.  D.  57)  were  still  an  host — i.  e.  a  host  for 
all  practical  purposes  of  competent  testimony  to  prove  a  fact  cog- 
nizant to  their  own  senses.  The  human  court  that  should  de- 
mand more  witnesses  than  the  greater  part  of  five  hundred  to  a 
fact  of  personal  observation,  would  prove  itself  incompetent  to 
sit  on  such  a  question.  Xo  judge  or  jury — being  sensible  men — 
ever  have  demanded  or  could  demand  the  personal  testimony  of 

so  great  a  cloud  of  witnesses  to  prove  a  f\ict  of  this  nature. 

Thus  it  appears  that  the  actual  resurrection  of  Jesus  from  the 
dead  lacks  no  sort  of  evidence  that  is  germain  to  such  a  question. 
The  evidence  is  also  abundantly  ample  in  amount.  No  suspicion 
can  attach  legitimately  to  the  transmission  of  this  evidence  in 
written  records  from  that  day  to  this.  There  Avas  divine  wisdom 
in  resting  this  pillar  of  the  Christian  system  upon  such  solid 
foundations. 

TVe  resume  the  narrative. 

15.  So  Avhen  they  had  dined,  Jesus  saitli  to  Simon  Peter, 
Simon,  son  of  Jonas,  lovest  thou  me  more  than  these?  He 
saith  unto  him,  Yea,  Lord ;  thou  knowest  that  I  love  thee. 
He  saith  unto  him.  Feed  my  lambs. 

16.  He  saith  to  him  again  the  second  time,  Simon,  ?.on  of 
Jonas,  lovest  thou  me?  Pie  saith  unto  him.  Yea,  Lord; 
thou  knowest  that  I  love  thee.  He  saith  unto  him,  Feed  my 
sheep. 

17.  He  saith  unto  him  the  third  time,  Simon,  son  of  Jo- 
nas, lovest  thou  me  ?  Peter  was  grieved  because  he  said 
unto  him  the  third  time,  Lovest  thou  me  ?  And  he  said  unto 
him,  Lord,  thou  knowest  all  things  ;  thou  knowest  that  I  love 
thee.     Jesus  saith  unto  him,  Feed  my  sheep. 

Dinner  being  past,  Jesus  has  a  word  for  Peter.  Since  that  sad 
scene  when  Jesus  stood  before  the  high  priest,  and  with  unutter- 
able sorrow,  heard  his  disciple  Peter,  standing  with  the  servants 
around  the  fire,  deny  him  thrice,  and  since  he  gave  him  that  one 
tender  yet  perhaps  reproving  look,  it  does  not  appear  that  he  had 
alluded  with  either  word  or  look  to  that  denial.  Here  his  mind 
reverts  to  that  scene.  Yet  we  may  observe  his  allusions  to  it 
are  rather  remote  than  direct — rather  to  the  antecedent  cause,  his 


GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XXI.  307 

excessive  self-confidenco,  tlian  to  the  dreadful  sin  itself: — "Simon, 
son  of  Jonas,  lovost  thou  me  more  than  these  other  disciples  do  ?  " 
Thou  Avilt  perhaps  remember  how  thou  didst  protest  so  earnestly — 
"  Though  all  shall  be  ofl'ended  because  of  thee,  yet  will  I  never 
be  offended"  (Matt.  2G  :  33,  35).     Is  it  quite  apparent   that  thy 

love  toward  me  has  been  greater  than  that  of  thy  brethren  ? 

Peter's  answer  prudently  omits  the  shading  of  comparison ;  he 
does  not  care  to  say — 7nore  and  better  than  his  brethren — but  his 
full  heart  prompts  him  to  say — "Lord,  thou  knowest  that  I  love 
thee."  To  which  Jesus  only  replies — Give  me  long  as  thou  livest 
this  proof  of  thy  love;  "  Feed  my  lambs."  "  When  thou  art  con- 
verted, strengthen  thy  brethren."  Avail  thj-self  of  all  this  sad 
experience  to  make  thj-sclf  a  better  pastor,  a  more  humble,  watch- 
ful shepherd — to  save  other  souls  in  their  scenes  of  spiritual 
peril. As  Peter  had  denied  his  Lord  three  times,  it  was  sug- 
gestive to  him  that  his  Lord  puts  to  him  this  searching  question 
three  times  in  succession — "  Lovest  thou  me?"  The  third  time 
Peter  was  grieved — perhaps  not  merely  because  it  reminded  him 
so  painfully  of  that  threefold  denial,  but  because  it  seemed  to 
imply  that  his  Lord  lacked  confidence  in  his  professions.  It  was 
to  the  latter  point  only  that  Peter  alludes  in  reply,  appealing  to 
his  knowledge  as  the  Searcher  of  hearts: — "Thou  who  knowest 

all   things,   knowest  that  I  love  thee." It  is  wonderful  how 

sweetly  Jesus  blends  the  faithful  Avith  the  kind  in  this  gentle  re- 
proof of  the  once  erring  but  now  penitent  Peter.  For  Peter  could 
no  longer  say  in  his  heart — ]My  Master  can  never  love  me  again — 
never  can  fully  and  freely  forgive  my  cruel  abuse  of  his  love  : — 
no,  verily ; — for  what  could  evince  more  tender  love  than  this  gen- 
tle, very  gentle  reproof  for  a  sin  so  flagrant  and  so  cruel  toward 
his  Master! 

18.  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee.  When  thou  wast  young, 
thou  girdest  thyself,  and  walkedst  whither  thou  wouldest : 
but  when  thou  shalt  be  old,  thou  shalt  stretch  forth  thy 
hands,  and  another  shall  gird  thee,  and  carry  tliee  whither 
tliou  wouldest  not. 

19.  This  spake  he,  signifying  by  what  death  he  should 
glorify  God.  And  when  he  had  spoken  this,  he  saith  unto 
him,  Follow  me. 

These  words  directly  apprise  Peter  of  his  future  destiny — viz. 
being  bound  and  imprisoned  for  the  Master's  cause.  Indirectly 
they  imply  that  from  this  time  he  will  be  faithful  to  his  Master 
even  to  death.  By  a  martyr's  death  he  will  glorify  God.  One 
s;id  fall  has  marred  his  Christian  life — but  it  shall  be  the  last! 
For  the  future,  having  worn  life  away  even  to  old  age  in  toil  for 
his  Master,  he  should  glorify  God  through  a  death  of  violence  from 

other  hands. Then,  that  Jesus  should  add — "  Follow  me  " — was 

once  more  to  signify — I  renew  my  call  of  thee  into  my  service. 
Do  not  allow  thyself  to  think  that  I  can  trust  thee  no  longer! 


308  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  X  XL 

20.  Then  Peter,  turning  about,  seeth  the'\^^if?P|^ '^^g"J°^| 
Jesus  loved  following ;    Avhich  also  leaned  on  \  ^|^  ^^^  ^ 
supper,  and  said.  Lord,  which  is  he  that  betrayeir',.   r^.  '  7   i^ 

21.  Peter  seeing  him  saith  to  Jesus,  Lord,  and  wu.I^ 

this  man  dof  ^ 

22.  Jesus  saith  unto  him,  If  I  will  that  he  tarry  till  I  com.,    ' 
what  is  that  to  thee  ?  follow  thou  me. 

23.  Then  went  this  saying  abroad  among  the  brethren, 
that  that  disciple  should  not  die :  yet  Jesus  said  not  unto 
him.  He  shall  not  die ;  but.  If  I  Avill  that  he  tarry  till  I 
come,  Avhat  is  that  to  thee? 

It  goes  to  prove  that  this  appendix  is  by  the  same  hand  as  the 
book  itself  (chap.  1-20) ;  that  the  writer  follows  the  same  method 
in  speaking  of  himself — "The  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved."  He 
further  identifies  himself  here  by  reference  to  the  very  distinct- 
ive scenes  at  the  table — as  in  John  13. This  John   falls  into 

line  with  Peter  in  following  Jesus.  Peter,  noticing  this,  is  moved 
(perhaps  by  curiosity)  to  ask  the  Lord  what  his  destiny  was  to  be. 
Thou  hast  told  me  mine;  please  tell  me  his  also. It  seems  de- 
signed for  a  gentle  rebuke  that  the  Lord  should  say — "If  I  will 

that  he  tarry  till  I  come,  what  is  that  to  thee?" Incidentally 

this  passage  may  furnish  light  as  to  the  sense  in  which  Jesus 
used  the  words — "  till  I   come ;  "  and  moreover,  light   as  to  the 

sense  put  upon  these  words  by  the  disciples. In  interpreting 

them  we  must  choose  between  the  three  following  possible 
senses  : — (1.)  Till  1  come  to  take  him  to  myself  at  his  death  ; — (2.) 
Till  I  come  for  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem; — (3.)  Till  I  come 
to  judge  the  world.  The  usage  of  this  phrase  in  the  lips  of  Je- 
sus takes  the  range  of  these  three  senses.     In  one  or  another  of 

them  we  must  interpret  these  words. The  first  is  utterly  inept : — 

If  I  will  that  he  live  till  he  dies — this  is  entirely  inadmissible. 

The  third  (last  named)  must  (as  it  seems  to  me)  l)c  set  aside,  since 
it  is  equivalent  to  saying — If  I  will  that  he  shall  never  die — for 
he  who  lives  till  the  final  judgment  escapes  death  altogether. 
But  this  was  the  very  misconstruction  which  John  is  laboring  to 
obviate.  This  was  the  "saying  that  went  abroad"  as  giving  the 
meaning  of  Jesus  in  those  words.     John  would   tell  his  readers 

that  this  saying  was  a  misapprehension — a  mistake. Of  course 

there  remains  only  the  second  sense — Till  I  come  to  overthrow 
the  Jewish  city  and  state.     In  fact  John  did  live  to  see  this  coming 

of  the  Lord. The  passage   moreover  shows  that,  before  this 

appendix  was  written,  the  apostles  had  inclined  to  give  these 
words  of  Jesus  (till  I  come)  the  third  sense  as  put  above — viz.  to 
apply  them  to  his  great  coming  to  the  final  judgment,  and  appar- 
ently, to  look  for  this  event  as  then  not  far  remote.  In  this  they 
were  mistaken.  Little  by  little  Jesus  and  his  teaching  Spirit 
sought  to  correct  this  erroneous  view  as  to  Christ's  then  future 
comine;. 


GOsrEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XXI.  309 

2-1.  This  is  the  disciple  which  testifieth  of  these  things, 
and  wrote  these  things :  and  we  know  that  his  testimony 
is  true. 

The  person  spoken  of  above  without  name,  and  very  indefinitely, 

is  here  purposely  identified  Avith  the  author  of  the  book. The 

plural,  "  we  know,"  has  given  certain  critics  occasion  to  say  that 
this  verse  must  have  come  from  some  other  hand  than  John's  be- 
cause John  could  not  claim  to  be  "we."  But  what  if  John  in- 
tended to  say  that  there  were  other  witnesses  beside  himself  to 
the  truth  of  his  statements  ?  The  word  "  we  "  might  include  with 
himself  an  indefinite  number  of  his  Christian  brethren,  cognizant 
like  himself  of  the  verity  of  the  transactions  he  has  here  re- 
corded. The  first  person  in  the  phrase  (v.  25) — "/  suppose" — 
goes  as  far  to  prove  that  some  one  man  (e.  g.  John)  wrote  these 
verses,  as  "  ii'<3  know"  does  to  prove  that  two  or  more  men  were 
the  authors. 

25.  And  there  are  also  many  other  things  which  Jesus 
did,  the  which,  if  they  should  be  written  every  one,  I  sup- 
pose that  even  the  world  itself  could  not  contain  the  books 
that  should  be  written.     Amen. 


"Things  which  Jesus  did" — should  in  strictness  refer  to  his 
works  rather  than  to  his  words  ;  yet  the  phrase  "  other  things  " 
suggests  that  words  are  included  here  no  less  than  acts.  This 
gospel  history  is  made  up  of  both,  and  the  matters  omitted  were 

of  the  same  character  as  the  matters  recorded. In  the  writer's 

view  it  were  vain  to  attempt  an  exhaustive  history  of  all  the  pre- 
cious words  of  Jesus,  or  of  all  his  blessed  deeds. That  "the 

Avorld  could  not  contain  the  books,"  etc.,  is  of  course  hyperbole, 
and  probably  is  a  proverbial  phrase — of  the  same  class  with  a 
"  camel  going  through  the  eye  of  a  needle."  It  is  simple  folly  to 
discuss  the  literal  truthfulness  of  such  phrases.  Men  have  alwaj^s 
taken  the  liberty  to  speak  in  proverbs,  and  more  or  less,  with  the 
exaggerations  of  hyperbole.  Sensible  readers  are  not  often  stum- 
bled by  such  liberties  of  language. In  what  sense  "could  not 

contain"  is  to  be  taken,  it  is  scarcely  worth  our  while  to  debate. 
Obviously  he  thinks  of  their  reception  and  utility  as  books  rather 
than  of  storing  them  in  warehouses  as  merchandise.  Even  the 
Bible  might  have  been  made  too  large,  too  copious,  for  its  own 

practical  purposes. It  will  be  noticed  that  this  remark  is  not 

out  of  place  at  the  close  of  this  appendix  to  John's  gospel.  He 
would  say — At  first  I  closed  this  history  with  an  allusion  to  its 
leading  purpose  (as  ye  may  see  in  20:  30,  31),  but  subsequently 
circumstances  occurred  which  called  for  this  brief  addition.  A 
great  many  more  things  are  yet  unwritten,  but  enough  for  all 
practical  purposes  is  recorded ;  too  much  would  be  an^vil  My 
14 


310  GOSPEL  OF  JOHN.— CHAP.  XXI. 

history  therefore  closes  here. If  we  may  suppose  him  aware 

of  what  his  brethi'en,  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke,  had  long  before 
written,  we  shall  have  a  deeper  sense  of  the  wisdom  which  guided 
him  in  the  selection  of  what  he  has  recorded.  As  to  the  wisdom 
of  omitting  what  is  nowhere  recorded,  it  is  ours  to  trust,  not  to 
judge. 


FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN. 


GENERAL    INTRODUCTION. 


The  preliminary  questions  useful  to  introduce  the  reader 
to  this  Epistle  are — 

I.    Who  ivas  the  author  ? 
II.    When,  where,  and  for  whom  originally,  Avas  it  Avritten  ? 

III.  AVhat  were  its  immediate  specific  objects  f  What  then 
present  wants  in  the  churches  did  it  aim  to  supply? 

IV.  What  are  its  relations  -(if  any)  to  the  gospel  of  John  ? 

I.  The  question  of  authorship  has  never  been  deemed  dif- 
ficult. By  most  if  not  all  good  critics,  the  author  of  this 
Epistle  is  held  to  be  the  same  John  who  wrote  the  gospel. 
Some  quite  decisive  historic  testimonies  have  come  down  to 
us  from  the  early  Christian  Fathers,  with  one  voice  to  this 
effect.  The  names  of  the  Avitnesses  are  of  the  best ;  Poly- 
carp  and  Papias  who  knew  John  personally ;  Irenseus,  a  dis- 
ciple of  Polycarp,  and  hence  but  one  remove  from  John; 
Origen  and  Clement,  both  of  Alexandria,  but  of 'world-wide 
learning  and  personal  knowledge  of  their  times.* 

But  foreign  historic  testimony  that  John  wrote  this  Epistle 
is  rendered  practically  needless  by  the  decisive  indications 
found  in  the  Epistle  itself — its  striking  similarity  to  the 
gospel  in  style,  in  spirit,  in  themes  of  discourse,  in  the  choice 
of  staple  terms  and  phrases — in  short,  in  every  prominent 
quality  which  gives  character  to  a  literary  production.  Let 
the   reader  note  how  much  this  writer  speaks  of  '^life;" 

*  More  is  said  of  the  personal  history  of  these  witnesses  in  my 
General  Introduction  to  the  Gospel  of  John. 

(311) 


312  GENERAL   INTRODUCTION. 

"  eternal  life; "  "  light,"  "  darkness  ;  "  of  walking  in  light  and 
of  walking  in  darkness;  of  love  to  God  and  love  of  the  breth- 
ren; of  faith  and  its  moral  power  ;  of  Jesus  as  the  Propitia- 
tion for  our  sins.  Recurring  to  the  gospel  he  will  find  that 
these  thoughts,  these  themes,  and  these  staple  forms  of  ex- 
pression, are  its  prominent  characteristics.  No  reader  can 
place  these  two  books  side  by  side,  examining  each  with 
care,  without  being  imj^ressed  with  their  remarkable  simi- 
larity in  all  vital  respects.  To  read  and  compare  them  is 
to  see  and  feel  the  proof  that  they  come  from  the  same 
literary  hand  and  from  the  same  Christian  heart. 

II.    When,  tchere,  and /or  ic/io?)!- originally,  was  it  written? 

As  to  the  date  of  this  Epistle,  nothing  decisive  has  come 
down  to  us  from  sources  external  to  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament.  Testimony  from  this  book  itself  is  only  approx- 
imate, not  specific.  The  Avriter  speaks  as  a  patriarch — an 
aged  father  to  his  little  children  ;  indicating  therefore  his 
own  advanced  age.  His  allusion  to  "the  last  time"  (2:  18) 
is  by  no  means  definite  as  to  date,  since  the  phrase  might 
refer  to  a  period  shortly  before  the  fall  of  Jerusalem ;  or  if 
to  a  point  subsequent  to  that  fall,  it  is  quite  impossible  to 
say  how  long  subsequent. 

Very  probably  it  was  written  after  the  gospel.  In  the  order 
of  nature  it  comes  after,  for  it  presupposes  the  facts  of  the 
gospel  history.  Its  object  coitld  scarcely  be  accomplished, 
nor  could  a  sensible  writer  expect  to  accomplish  it,  except 
as  it  rested  on  a  general  knowledge  of  the  facts  of  that  gos- 
pel history.  In  other  words,  with  such  an  object  in  view  as 
this  Epistle  manifests,  the  author  would  certainly  write  his 
gospel  history  first  and  this  Ej)istle  subsequently,  based  upon 
those  historic  facts.  Since  nothing  forbids  us  to  date  the 
Epistle  after  the  gospel,  and  the  considerations  above  named 
favor  it,  we  may  safely  rest  in  this  conclusion. 

As  to  the  locality  of  the  author  at  his  writing,  it  may  be 
said — 

(a.)  That  by  general  consent  of  the  Christian  Fathers, 
John  removed  from  Jerusalem  to  Ephesus  shortly  before  Je- 
rusalem fell ;  and  passed  the  remaining  years  of  his  life  in 
that  city,  or  in  its  vicinity. 

(6.)  In  John's  gospel  we  noticed  the  frequent  explanation 
of  Jewish  customs  and  of  Hebrew  words  and  phrases — im- 
plying that  he  wrote  Avith  his  e3'e  on  other  than  Jewish 
readers,  for  men  residing  elsewhere  than  in  Palestine,  and 
supposably  for  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor.     These  circum- 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION.  313 

stances  support  the  theory  that  this  Epistle  also  was  Avrit- 
teu  from  Ephesus,  aud  for  the  same  original  readers  as  his 
gospel. 

(c.)  The  flict  that  in  his  Apocalypse  John  sent  letters  to 
the  seven  churches  of  Asia  adds  still  further  corroboration. 
Moreover,  those  brief  letters  show  that  false  teachers  were 
oven  then  imperiling  the  purity  of  those  churches,  and  that, 
as  usual,  immoral  practices  accompanied  (or  followed)  de- 
partures from  the  faith  in  Jesus.  Correspondingly,  in  this 
Epistle  also  we  find  allusions  to  doctrinal  errors  and  to  de- 
generacy in  morals.  These  coincidences  strongly  favor  the 
theory  that  this  Epistle  had  in  view  the  same  churches,  and 
the  same  prevalent  or  threatening  evils  within  them. 

III.  What  were  its  hnmediats  objects  f  ^Vhat  then  pres- 
ent wants  in  the  churches  did  it  aim  to  supply  ? 

To  these  inquii'ies  the  Epistle  itself  gives  no  uncertain  an- 
swer. Its  one  comprehensive  object  is  put  distinctly  (2 :  1) 
in  the  words — "These  things  I  write  unto  you  that  ye  sin 
not."  The  whole  Epistle  ojDposes  sin  ;  urges  personal  holi- 
ness. Every  thing  looks  toward  a  truer,  stronger  love,  aud 
a  purer  life. 

To  accomplish  these  objects  required  efibrt  in  two  direc- 
tions:  (1.)  To  v.'ithstand  errors  in  doctrine,  especially  those 
which  dried  up  the  very  fountains  of  gospel  life  and  power 
— e.  g.  denying  that  Jesus  Christ  had  come  in  the  flesh. — 
(2.)  To  show  tliat  the  great  facts  of  the  gospel — such  as  the 
provisions  made  for  pardon  and  victory  over  sin ;  the  great 
love  of  God  for  lost  men,  revealed  in  Jesus  Christ — de- 
mand of  believers  a  loving  heart  and  a  blameless  life. 

Hence,  to  maintain  the  fundamental  truths  of  the  gospel 
scheme,  and  to  show  the  natural  legitimate  connection  be- 
tween faith  in  these  truths  and  a  really  Christian  life,  are 
the  main  objects  sought  in  this  Epistle. 

IV.  What,  if  awj,  are  its  relations  to  the  gospel  of  John  f 
Briefly  said,  its  relations  to  the  gospel  are  supplemental. 

It  aims  to  secure  more  thoroughly  the  declared  objects  of  the 
gospel;  viz.  "  that  ye  may  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ, 
and  that,  believing,  ye  may  have  life  through  his  name." 
He  would  give  men  more  just  views  of  the  iSonship  of  Je- 
sus and  of  the  atoning  vii'tue  of  his  death ;  would  exhort 
them  to  a  more  intelligent  and  steadfast  faith  in  these  truths ; 
would  admonish  them  against  those  perversions  and  abuses 
of  the  gospel  which  would  emasculate  its  moral  power  toward 
the    spiritual  life  of  faith  and  love  and  the   moral  life  of 


314  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION. 

practical  godliness.  He  saAV  that  iu  both  directions — poison- 
ing the  fountains  of  gospel  truth,  and  diverting  its  streams 
from  their  place  of  power  and  blessing  in  the  Christian 
heart  and  life — there  was  need  of  vigorous  effort.  So  he 
sent  forth  this  brief  but  vigorous  Epistle  for  the  joint  pur- 
poses of  working  a  purer  doctrinal  faith  and  of  promoting  a 

better  Christian  life. How  he  made  and   sustained  his 

points,  we  shall  see  as  we  bring  his  words  under  special  con- 
sideration. His  object  Avas  thoroughly  practical;  his  points 
made  are  exquisitely  simple,  yet  subhmely  grand ;  his  logic, 
none  can  gainsay;  the  love  of  his  heart,  manifested  richly 
throughout  the  Epistle,  should  endear  these  messages  to  the 
church  of  every  age.  Truly  Ave  have  cause  of  gratitude  to 
the  Inspiring  Mind  for  raising  up  such  a  Avitness  in  behalf 
of  gospel  truth  and  for  bequeathing  to  the  Christian  Avorld 
this  last  legacy  from  his  pen. 


FIKST  EriSTLE  OF  JOHN. 


CIIAPTEll    1. 

"With  no  formal  introduction;  with  no  hint  as  to  the  people  oi* 
cliurchcs  specially  addressed;  the  writer  enters  at  once  upon  his 
work,  giving  first  the  subject  matter — the  great  theme  of  which 
he  is  to  speak,  viz.  the  incarnate  Son  of  God  (vs.  1-3) ;  then  the 
purpose  or  object  in  view  (vs.  3,  4) ;  the  substance  of  his  message 
(v.  5);  the  personal  application  of  the  truth  conveyed  in  this  mes- 
sage and  its  fruits  (vs.  6,  7) ;  and  especially  that  it  is  a  salvation 
from  sin  provided  for  men  who  are  sinners  (vs.  8-10). 

1.  That  which  Avas  from  the  beginning,  which  we  have 
heard,  which  we  have  seen  with  onr  eyes,  which  we  have 
loolied  upon,  and  our  hands  have  handled,  of  the  Word  of 
life; 

2.  (For  the  life  Avas  manifested,  and  Ave  haA'e  seen  it,  and 
liear  Avitness,  and  shew  unto  you  that' eternal  life,  Avhich  was 
Avith  the  Father,  and  Avas  manifested  unto  us ;) 

3.  That  Avhich  Ave  haA'e  seen  and  heard  declare  Ave  unto 
you,  that  ye  also  may  have  fellowship  Avitli  us :  and  truly 
our  felloAVship  ^s  Avith  the  Father,  and  Avitli  his  Son  Jesus 
Christ. 

No  reader  can  fail  to  note  the  striking  similarity  between  the 
opening  of  this  epistle  and  the  opening  of  John's  gospel.  Alike 
they  discard  all  preliminaries ;  alike  they  call  our  thought  at  once 
to  the  person  of  the  eternal  Word,  made  manifest  in  human  flesh 
— the  incarnate  Son  of  God.  Most  of  the  same  descriptive  terms 
are  here  which  are  there,  this  Great  Personage  being  set  forth  as 
"  the  Word  of  life,"  who  was  "  from  the  beginning;  '  was  "with 
the  Father;  "  and  was  "made  manifest  to  us."  Remarkably,  this 
last  point — his  manifestation  to  us  (his  disciples) — is  expanded 
with  great  fullness: — "which  we  have  heai'd,'  i.  e.  whose  human 
voice  our  mortal  ears  have  heard ;  Avhom  we  have  seen  Avith  our 
own  eyes  as  human  eyes  see  felloAv-men  in  the  flesh  ;  "  Avhom  we 
have  looked  upon,"  giving  yet  another  but  analocous  Greek  A'erb 

>15) 


316  I.  JOHN.— CHAr.  I. 

of  seeing  ■which  superadds  the  idea  of  attentive  contemphition  ; — 
and  whom  our  hands  have  handled — or  better,  whom  we  have 
touched  with  our  hands  as  in  the  familiar  intercourse  of  human 
life,  and  perhaps  with  some  allusion  to  unbelieving  Thomas,  per- 
mitted to  put  his  hand  into  the  print  of  the  nails  and  into  the 
wounds  in  his  side.  We  can  not  fail  to  notice  that  this  repetition 
and  reiteration  were  intended  for  strong  testimony  to  the  actual 
appearance  of  the  divine  "Word  in  human  flesh,  in  a  real  personal 
body,  like  other  human  bodies — very  possibly  to  bear  against 
the  notion  that  the  body  of  Jesus  was  not  material  but  spiritual ; 
was  a  body  in  appearance  only,  not  in  fact;  a  mere  phantom, 
unsubstantial  and  unreal. 

Thus  John  labors  to  emphasize  and  expand  the  true  idea  of 
his  cardinal  woi'd  ^'manifest ;"  the  human  body  of  Jesus  brought 
before  our  very  senses;  his  voice  entering  our  ears;  his  form 
present  to  our  mortal  eyes  under  every  variety  of  condition  ; 
his  material  body  subjected  to  our  touch.  He  lived  with  us; 
talked,  Avalked,  toiled,  rested,  slept,  waked,  ate  and  drank  before 
and  with  us  as  man  with  man,  as  friend  with  friend.  What 
more  or  better  evidence  of  a  true  and  real  human  nature  could 
we  desire  ? 

What  we  have  thus  seen  and  heard  we  now  declare  to  you. 
Our  desire  in  this  writing  is  that  ye  may  be  brought  into  full 
fellowship  with  us,  that  is  to  say — that  ye  may  come  to  know 
the  Father  and  the  Son  Jesus  Christ  as  we  have  learned  to  know 
them,  "and  that  ye  may  enjoy  the  communion  of  love  with  the 
Father  and  the  Son  as  we  do ;  so  shall  we  have  fellowship  with 
each  other.  For  we  would  have  you  understand  fully  that  we 
enjoy  the  fellowship  of  love  and  friendship  with  the  Father  and 
with  his  Son. 

Fellowship !     How  shall  we  fathom  the  depth  of  meaning  in 

this  precious  word  ? Going   down  into  the  essential  idea  of 

the  original  word  *  we  find  it  signifies  somewhat  in  common  be- 
tween two  parties,  having  for  its  basis  a  more  or  less  intimate 
knowledge  of  each  other,  upon  which  is  founded  a  common  in- 
terest, a  common  sympathy,  a  common  mutual  love.  Such  is 
fellowship  between  one  human  being  and  another ;  such  in  its 
nature  must  be  the  fellowship  of  man  with  his  Maker  and  Re- 
deemer. 

In  yet  another  line  of  search  into  the  deep  significance  of 
this  word,  we  might  follow  the  thread  of  John's  personal  his- 
tory, asking  how  it  came  to  pass  that  he  reached  this  conscious 
sense  of   fellowship  with  the    Father  and  Avith    his    Son    Jesus 

Christ. The   gospel    history  from    his  pen  gives  us  the  first 

utterances  of  this  precious  testimony.  The  opening  verses  of 
this  epistle  echo  the  same  voice.  John  seems  to  have  been  a 
relative,  perhaps  a  cousin,  to  the  child  Jesus,  born  of  Mary. 
Having  been  a  disciple  of  John  the  Baptist,  he  was  early  pre- 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  I.  317 

pared  to  become  one  of  the  first  disciples  and  followers  of  Jesup. 
Among  the  chosen  twelve,  he  was  brought  nearest  to  the  loving 
heart  of  the  Master;  sat  by  his  side  at  the  last  supper,  and 
leaned  on  his  bosom  there ;  was  one  of  the  three  chosen  to  wit- 
ness the  transfiguration,  and  to  be  nearest  the  Great  Sufferer 
during  his  agony  in  the  garden.  Among  the  eleven,  he  only 
seems  to  have  been  near  tlie  cross  during  the  dread  agonies 
borne  by  Jesus  there.  Who  first  gave  him  the  distinctive  title, 
"  The  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved,"  we  are  not  told  ;  but  we  may 
think  of  him  as  knowing  the  heart  of  Jesus  beyond  most  of 
his  brethren — as  having  entered  most  deeply  into  Ris  sympathies 
— -as  giving  to  him  the  purest  love  of  his  own  heart.  It  was 
John  Avho  testified  of  Jesus  that,  "  having  loved  his  OAvn  that 
were  in  the  Avorld,  he  loved  them  to  the  end"  (John  13:  1); 
John  who  remembered  and  recorded  the  precious  words  : — "  He 
that  hath  my  commandments  and  keepcth  them,  he  it  is  that 
loveth  me ;  and  he  that  loveth  me  shall  be  loved  of  my  Father, 
and  1  will  love  him,  and  will  manifest  myself  unto  him." — 
Also  : — "  If  a  man  love  me  he  will  keep  my  words,  and  my 
Father  will  love  him,  and  we  will  come  unto  him,  and  make 
our  abode  with  him"  (John  14:  21,  23).  We  must  suppose  that 
John  had  a  lively  and  deep  sense  of  the  meaning  of  these  words 
and  a  precious  experience  of  the  communion  they  promise. 
]\Ioreover,  it  was  through  knowing  Jesus  so  well  that  he  came 
into  similar  communion  and  fellowship  with  the  Father.  John 
above  any  other  sacred  writer  has  unfolded  this  great  idea — that 
to  know  Jesus  is  to  knotv  the  Father.  "  Have  1  been  so  long 
time  with  you,  and  yet  hast  thou  not  known  me,  Philip  ?  He 
that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father  "  (John  14 :  9). 

Thus  pushing  our  inr^uiries  historically,  we  may  get  somewhat 
definite  conceptions  of  .what  John  means  by  "  fellowship  with 
the  Father  and  with  his  Son."  First  in  the  order  of  time,  he 
came  to  know  and  to  love  the  incarnate  Son.  Through  the  in- 
timacies of  close  acquaintance  and  of  confidential  friendship ; 
through  the  perpetual  manifestations  of  loving  sympathy;  through 
the  profoundest  appreciation  and  admiration  of  the  character  of 
.Jesus,  and  by  means  of  shaping  his  own  character  more  and 
more  into  the  same  image,  there  sprung  up  the  sweet  confidence 
of  mutual  friendship  and  fellowship.  The  two  friends  became 
one  in  heart  and  sympathy;  one  in  the  purposes  and  aims  of  life. 

From  this  point  we  have  only  to  advance  one  short  step  fur- 
ther and  note  that  the  human  Jesus  as  thus  seen  and  studied, 
known  and  loved  in  the  flesh,  brought  John  to  know  Jesus  as  di- 
vine— as  the  Logos  whose  glories  shone  forth  and  were  manifested 
in  the  sinless  man.  And  then,  through  the  manifestations  of  him 
who  was  at  once  the  Son  of  man  and  the  Son  of  God,  John  came 
to  know  the  Father  and  to  have  fellowship  with  him.  The  incar- 
nation was  the  stepping-stone  for  the  ascent  upward  from  man  to 
God.  Thus  the  disciple  John  was  introduced  to  the  Logos  as  re- 
vealed through  the  man  Jesus,  and  through  Him,  to  the  Eternal 


318  I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  I. 

Fattier. Essentially  what  was  true  of  John  becomes  true  of  all 

disciples  of  Jesus.  By  faith  and  love  they  enter  into  the  same 
deep  communion  and  fellowship  with  the  Father  and  with  his 
Son  Jesus  Christ. 

And  now  as  to  the  essential  blessedness  of  this  fellowship  with 
the  Father  and  the  Son  as  possible  to  be  enjoyed  even  here  and 
nqw  by  mortals  of  our  race,  I  have  no  Avords — I  know  of  none — 
adequate  to  set  it  forth.  To  know  a  God,  so  pure,  so  good,  so 
gloj-ious ;  to  love  such  a  God  with  undivided,  supreme  affection, 
and  devotion ;  to  come  into  the  fellowship  of  humble  trust,  un- 
qualified submission,  gi-ateful  and  devout  adoration  on  the  human 
side — over  against  which  on  the  divine  shall  be  the  manifestation 
of  God's  forgiving  love,  sympathy,  and  care;  to  feel  a  deep  con- 
sciousness that  this  union  of  fellowship  and  friendship  is  real,  is 
sure,  is  growing,  is  promised  of  God  to  endure  forever — what 
shall  we — Avhat  can  we  say  that  will  adequately  set  forth  its 
blessedness! 

Corresponding  to  the  gloi'y  and  worth  of  this  blessedness  possi- 
ble to  human  souls  is  the  value  of  those  revelations  of  God  to 
men  through  his  incarnate  Son,  and  through  his  indwelling 
Spirit,  by  means  of  Avhich  it  has  been  gained  and  realized,  and  is 
surely  made  possible  to  redeemed  sinners.  When  "  the  discijale 
whom  Jesus  loved"  pours  out  before  us  the  fullness  of  his  heart 
in  such  heaven-inspired  words  as  we  find  in  this  epistle,  let  us 
accept  them  as  warmed  with  the  deepest  love  of  his  soul,  and  as 
witnessing  to  the  ripe  and  blessed  experience  of  one  who  felt 
that  he  had  "  fcUuwshij^  with  the  Father  and  with  his  Sou  Jesus 
Christ." 

4.  And  t)iese  things  write  we  unto  you,  that  your  joy  may 

■be  full.  •'. 
r/ 
The  improved  text  reads  this  verse — "  These  things  Ave  write 
that  our  (not  "youx")  joy  may  be  full."  Assuming  this  to  be 
what  John  wrote,  we  must  interpret  him  to  mean — Our  burdened 
heart  must  have  relief  by  pouring  out  these  Avords  of  love  and 
sympathy.  We  so  long  to  see  you  all  sharing  in  common  with  ua 
this  deep  and  true  felloAvship  Avith  the  Father  and  Avith  his  Son 
— how  can  we  forbear  to  Avrite  j^ou  these  testimonies  to  the  truth 
as  it  is  in  Jesus  ? 

5.  This  then  is  the  message  Avhicli  we  have  heard  of  him, 
and  declare  unto  you,  that  God  is  light,  and  in  him  is  no 
darkness  at  all. 

"  This  is  the  message  " — the  great  central  truth,  comprehensive 
above  any  other — Avhich  Ave  have  heard  from  him  (i.  e.  Jesus 
as  manifesting  God  to  men) ;  and  "  declare  unto  you,"  not  in 
this  epistle  only,  but  in  the  gospel  history  which  I  wrote  to  you 
as  well — ''that  God  is  light" — pure  light,  with  no  darkness 
whatever.      "Light,"    then,  is   the  A'ital   word   in  the    message. 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  I.  •  319 

What  is  the  precise  and  full  idea  in  this  ■word  when  applied  as 
here  to  describe  or  interpret  to  us  God  ? Perhaps  our  best  con- 
ception of  it  is  a  blending  of  the  two  ideas — trvth  and  purity  ; 
truth  as  related  to  the  intelligence ;  jiuritj  or  holiness  as  related 
to  the  moral  nature.  Truth  is  a  better  word  than  knowledge  only 
in  so  far  as  it  better  gives  the  notion  of  what  is  absolutely  relia- 
ble— certainly  in  harmony  with  focts  as  they  are  ;  and  also  be- 
cause it  has  been  associated  with  knowledge  concerning  God,  and 
knowledge  coming  from  God  concerning  his  creatures.  Knowl- 
edge is  to  the  mind  what  light  is  to  the  eye,  so  that  the  word 
"  light,"  borrowed  from  the  material  world,  gives  us  a  very  happy 
conception  of  that  true  knowledge  w^hich  emanates  from  God 
even  as  heaven's  light  beams  on  our  eyes  from  God's  sun  in  the 
heavens.  Then,  moreover,  the  related  idea  of  moral  purity  in- 
heres in  the  word  light,  as  darkness  and  sin  are  kindred  ideas. 
All  deeds  of  sin  and  shame  love  darkness,  and  can  not  bear  the 
light.  So  we  get  the  full  and  ti-ue  sense  of  this  richly  compre- 
hensive word  "light"  as  said  of  God  when  we  combine  the  two 
great  ideas — truth,  and  purity  or  holiness.  Precious  ideas  they 
are  indeed : — God,  the  infinite  fountain  of  truth — of  all  that 
knowledge  wdiich  illumines  the  mind  and  blesses  the  souls  of  all 
intelligent  beings  in  heaven  and  in  earth  :  who  is  also  the  foun- 
tain of  holiness,  moral  purity ;  its  best  model  and  exemplar,  and 
forever  giving  forth  influences  and  agencies  to  beget  correspond- 
ing holiness  in  creatures  as  they  come  under  the  impression  of 
his  perfect,  blessed  character.  God  truthful;  God  sinless; — God 
the  fountain  of  all  truth ;  God  the  Author  and  Giver  of  all  holi- 
ness to  his  creatures — these  are  the  great  ideas  which  lie  in  the 
word  Light  as  it  stands  here  descriptive  of  God. 

6.  If  ■we  say  that  ■we  have  fellowship  "with  him,  and  ■walk 
in  darkness,  we  lie,  and  do  not  the  truth  : 

7.  But  if  we  -walk  in  the  light,  as  he  is  in  the  light,  we 
liave  fellow^ship  one  Avith  another,  and  the  blood  of  Jesus 
Christ  his  Son  cleanseth  us  from  all  sin. 

Let  no  one  suppose  that  to  call  God  liglit  is  so  abstract  and 
metaphysical  as  to  be  almost  unmeaning  and  void  of  practical 
bearing  upon  human  souls.  Nothing  could  be  farther  from  the 
focts  of  the  case.  For,  observe :  this  great  abstract  idea  of  God 
is  brought  to  view  here  for  the  very  purpose  of  its  practical  bear- 
ings. Does  any  man  say,  "  I  have  fellowship  with  God,"  while 
yet  he  walks  in  darkness,  i.  e.  sin,  he  certainly  says  what  is  not 
true,  and  what  in  his  case  can  not  possibly  be  true.  Light  and 
darkness  have  nothing  in  common — have  no  communion  with 
each  other.  To  have  fellowship  with  God  is  to  see  and  to  love 
all  that  we  know  to  be  true  of  him ;  is  to  have  in  good  degree 
his  purity ;  implies  certainly  that  one  loves  holiness,  seeks  it, 
longs  for  it,  cherishes  and  cultivates  it  as  the  heart's  richest 
treasure.     l>ut  this  is  utterly  inconsistent  with  walking  in  dark- 


320  .  r.  JOHN.— CHAP.  I. 

ness.  Men  do  not  walk  in  the  darkness  of  night  Avhen  the  sun 
shines  full-  in  the  heavens  above  them  ;  so  neither  do  men  walk 
in  the  ways  of  sin  while  the  light  of  God  shines  full  on  their 
souls,  and  they  are  in  hearty  sympathy  and  fellowship  with  God. 
The  incompatibility  is  as   absolute    in   the   one    case  as  in  the 

othei*. To  "  do  not  the  truth  "  is  to  be  wholly  out  of  harmony 

with  it,  living  in  constant  violation  of  its  spirit  and  of  its  moral 
demands.  The  man  who  lives  so  and  yet  claims  to  be  in  felloAV- 
ship  with  God  is  either  trying  to  deceive  others,  or  is  deceived  as 
to  himself. 

On  the  other  hand,  if  we  Avalk  in  the  light  as  God  is  in  the 
light — walk  according  to  his  trvith  as  made  known  to  us,  meeting 
every  call  of  duty,  j'ielding  sweetly  to  every  honest  moral  convic- 
tion, seeking  supremely  to  know  God's  will  and  to  do  it,  then  "Ave 
have  fellowship  one  with  another;"  a  kindred  spirit  animates  all 
hearts  that  are  in  this  common  moral  attitude  toward  God  and  his 
truth.  This  walking  in  the  light  of  God  is  so  nearly  the  same 
thing  in  all  human  souls  and  produces  so  fully  the  same  sjDiritual 
results  that  there  will  surely  be  a  cordial  fellowship  and  sympa- 
thy between  all  who  stand  in  this  common  relation  to  the  Great 
Father  of  light  and  of  love. 

To  show  how  the  light  (truth)  that  comes  from  God  is  brought 
to  bear  practically  upon  those  who  receive  and  love  it,  the  writer 
comes  doAvn  from  abstract,  general  forms  of  statement  to  the  spe-. 
cific  and  concrete — to  tell  us  how  our  sin  is  taken  away  and  we 
are  restored  to  the  pure  moral  image  of  God:  viz.  thus: — ''Tlte 
blood  of  Jesus  Christ  his  Son  cleanseth  us  from  all  sin." 

Upon  this  very  rich  and  expressive  passage,  all  thoughtful 
readers  will  naturally  raise  two  main  questions: 

(1.)  How  is  it  that  blood,  naturallj^  defiling,  should  be  said  here 
to  "cleanse"  ? 

(2.)  Does  this  cleansing  refer  to  forgiveness  or  to  sanctification; 
which,  if  either  alone,  or  may  it  include  both  ? 

(1.)  That  blood  should  cleanse — a  result  so  foreign  from  its  na- 
ture and  from  the  current  ideas  of  mankind — must  be  due  to 
some  very  special  quality — some  fact  quite  aside  from  the  com- 
mon course  of  things.  Xo  other  explanation  can  be  given  except 
that  which  comes  from  the  bloody  sacrifices  of  the  early  ages  of  the 
race,  unfolded  fully  in  the  Mosaic  sacrificial  system.  There  the 
great  idea  stands  forth  in  the  light  of  God's  own  institution — that 
"  without  the  shedding  of  blood,  there  is  no  remission  of  sin ;" 
yet  that  with  it,  under  it,  by  means  of  it — atonement  is  made  and 
God  forgives  the  penitent  offerer.  The  voice  of  God  speaks  in 
those  bloody  sacrifices— Let  the  innocent  lamb  be  offered  in  sac- 
rifice on  mine  altar;  so  his  blood  shall  make  atonement  for  your 
souls.  He  shall  die  that  ye  may  live.  Thus  and  thus  only  did 
blood  under  the  old  economy  become  an  emblem  of  moral 
cleansing.  Forgiveness  of  sin  came  through  the  shedding  of 
blood.     The  death  of  Jesus  as  "the  Lamb  of  God"  fills  out  the 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  I.  321 

prophetic  (or  typical)  idea  of  the  ancient  lamb  of  sacrifice  and  has 
availed  to  "take  away  the  siu  of  the  world."   (John  1  :  29.) 

(2.)  As  to  the  second  main  question — the  sense  of  the  term 
"  cleanse,"  I  accept  it  as  comprehending  both  forgiveness  and 
sanctification.  When  the  sacred  writers  aim  at  the  utmost 
brevity  in  speaking  of  the  great  work  of  Christ  for  uien,  they 
bring  to  view  the  moral  cleansing; — c.  g.  "  Slialt  call  his  name 
Jesus,  for  he  shall  save  his  people  from  their  sins;"  "Behold  the 
Lamb  of  God  who  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world;"  "  The  blood 
of  Jesus  cleanses  from  all  sin."  Yet  tlicy  understood  as  fully  as 
we  do  that  there  are  really  two  quite  distinct  parts  of  this  one 
great  work;  viz.  the  forgiveness  of  past  sin,  and  the  recovery  of 
the  soul  from  the  spirit  of  sinning — its  restoration  to  moral  pu- 
rity. We  may  see  in  v.  D  below  that  John  has  both  these  ideas 
in  his  mind:  "lie  is  faithful  and  just" — first  to  forgive  us  our 
sins ;  secondly — to  cleanse  us  from  all  unrighteousness.  Hence 
we  must  comprise  under  the  words — "  cleanseth  us  from  sin" — 
both  forgiveness  and  moi'al  purification ;  both  the  blotting  out  of 
sins  past,  and  the  taking  away  from  the  heart  the  love  and  the 

indulgence  of  sin. It  is  the  more  admissible — nay,  more  than 

that — the  more  appropriate  to  group  these  two  ideas,  forgiveness 
and  moral  transformation,  under  the  one  word  "change" — (1.) 
because  moral  transforming  always  presupposes  forgiveness,  inas- 
much as  forgiveness  naturally  comes  first  in  order :  no  one  be- 
comes pure  in  heart  till  first  forgiven: — and  (2.)  because  the 
method  of  God's  own  providing  for  the  pardon  of  sin,  through 
the  atoning  death  of  Jesus,  itself  develops  a  mighty  power  of  truth 
and  love,  bearing  toward  the  cleansing  of  human  souls  from  sin. 
"  For  the  love  of  Christ  constraineth  us."  How  can  we  sin 
against  him  who  has  loved  us  even  unto  dying  for  us  that  we  may 

live  ? Thus  the  taking  away  of  sins  past  by  pardon  and  of  the 

sinning  heart  present,  by  moral  cleansing,  are  naturally  linked 
together,  both  in  the  divine  agencies  that  work  them  out  in  hu- 
man souls,  and  in  the  experience  of  all  saved  men.  Hence  we 
may  know  that  when  moral  cleansing  is  named,  forgiveness  is 
certainly  presupposed  and  implied. 

These  verses  (7-9)  have  sometimes  been  pressed  to  make  them 
bear  upon  the  question  of  sinless  perfection  in  the  present  life. 
It  can  never  be  well  to  force  any  passage  of  Scripture  to  testify 
on  a  point  irrelevant  to  its  true  design.  In  this  passage  there  is 
no  apparent  indication  that  John  had  this  particular  question  in 
his  mind  at  all.  \Yhat  he  would  say  on  this  question  he  has  not 
told  us  here — certainly  not  in  direct,  explicit  terms.  How  the 
things  he  does  say  bear  legitimately  on  this  question  can  be 
reached  only  by  inference.  For  plainly  the  two  opposite  charac- 
ters present  to  his  thought  in  this  passage  are — (a)  The  man  who 
Avalks  in  darkness — who,  if  he  says  he  has  fellowship  Avith  God, 
lies,  and  does  not  the  truth — the  open,  manifest  sinner  on  the 
one  hand;  {b)  And  on  the  other  hand  the  honest,  sincere  be- 
liever, who  walks  in  the  light  of  God,  has  fellowship  of  soul  with 


322  I.  JOPLV.— CHAP.  I. 

all  the  Chi-istlan  brotherhood,  and  really  Avith  the  Father  and  the 
Son.  These  are  the  two  opposite  characters  of  Avhom  he  speaks. 
The  former  class  stand  utterly  aloof  froro  Jesus  as  a  Savior,  de- 
claring— "we  have  no  sin"  (v.  8);  "  Ave  have  not  sinned"  (v. 
10);  we  have  no  need  of  such  help  as  your  system  of  so-called 
salvation  in  Christ  professes  to  provide. The  other  class  con- 
fess  themselves  sinners  :    "  God  is  faithful  and  just   to  forgive 

tlieir  sins,  and  to  cleanse  them  from  all  unrighteousness." 

These  are  the  two  classes,  morally  considered,  of  whom  he 
speaks,  and  this  is  what  he  says  of  them  respectively.  Upon  the 
new  and  quite  distinct  question  whether  this  moral  cleansing  be- 
comes absolutely  perfect  on  earth,  we  can  not  assume  that  he  in- 
tended to  express  an  opinion.  Indeed,  if  we  make  him  speak  di- 
rectly to  this  point,  I  do  not  see  how  we  can  defend  him  from 
self-contradiction;  for  on  the  one  hand  we  should  make  him  say 
— "  The  blood  of  Jesus  cleanses  us  from  all  sin  " — absolutely,  per- 
fectly from  all — CA'en  here  and  now; — but  on  the  otlie-r  hand,  in 
the  next  breath  we  make  him  declare  that  "  if  we  say  we  have 
no  sin  at  all,  Ave  deceive  ourselves,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us  " — 
all  which  would  amount  to  saying  that  salvation  by  Christ  is  an 
impossible  experience ;  that  nobody  is  cleansed  from  sin  by  the 

blood  of  Christ. Such  results  come  of  forcing  a  man's  Avords 

beyond  his  intent,  and  applying  them  to  questions  entirely  for- 
eign from  his  thought.  Hence  I  have  ventured  to  call  the  appli- 
cation of  John's  Avords  here  to  this  modern  question  "  a  side 
issue,"  quite  remote  from  his  purpose  and  intent. 

8.  If  Ave  say  that  Ave  liaA^e  no  siii,  we  deceive  ourselves, 
and  the  truth  is  not  in  us. 

9.  If  Ave  confess  our  sins,  he  is  faithful  and  just  to  forgi\'e 
us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all  unrighteousness. 

10.  If  Ave  say  that  we  have  not  sinned,  Ave  make  him  a 
liar,  and  his  Avord  is  not  in  us. 

On  these  verses  the  first  question  exegetically  Avlll  be  Avhether 
the  same  class  are  in  John's  thought  in  both  v.  8  and  \.  10, — in 
the  former,  saying — "  Ave  have  no  sin;"  in  the  latter,  saying — 
"  we  have  not  sinned." 

That  these  slightly  differing  descriptive  phrases  do  refer  to  the 
same  class  of  men,  is  rendered  more  than  probable — nearly  or 

quite  certain — by  these  facts: (a)  That  John  affirms  of  them 

both  the  same  things — in  the  former  verse  "they  deceive  them- 
selves; "  in  the  latter  they  "  make  him  (God)  a  liar;  "  in  the  for- 
mer verse,  "the  truth  is  not  in  them;  "  in  the  latter,  "his  Avord 

is  not  in  them;" {h)  By  the  further  fact  that  in  both   these 

verses  the  characters  described  are  put  in  contrast  with  those 
who  confess  their  sins,  and  whom  God  "is  faithful  and  just  to  for- 
give and  to  cleanse  from  all  unrighteousness ;  " — and  again  (c) 
By  the  fact  that  a  fair  construction  of  the  words  in  v.  8  gives  es- 
sentiallv  the  same  sense  as  the  Avords  of  v.  10  boar.     "If  Ave  sav 


I.  JOHN.— ciiAr.  I.  323 

that  WG  have  no  sin,"  /.  e.  no  sin  that  needs  to  be  forgiven  and 
cleansed ;  if  we  take  the  ground  that  we  have  no  occasion  for 
Buch  a  Savior  as  Jesus — a  Bavior  provided  for  sinners — we  virtu- 
ally say  that  "  we  have  not  sinned."  ''They  that  are  whole  have 
no  need  of  a  physician."  ]n  both  verses  (8,  10)  the  men  who 
have  no  sense  of  being  personal  sinners — who  refuse  to  see  any 
sin,  wrong,  guilt,  in  themselves — are  described  and  their  case 
put.  We  may  conclude  therefore  that  in  each  of  these  verses 
John  describes  the  same  moral  class  of  men. 

Such  men  never  come  to  Jesus  for  pardon,  cleansing,  and  life. 

They  rule  themselves  out  from  the  range  of  gospel  blessings. 

But  alas !  they  utterly  deceive  themselves ;  the  truth  is  "not  in 
them.  They  represent  God  to  be  a  liar,  for  God  declares  all  men 
to  be  in  sin.  The  giving  of  his  Son  to  die  for  men  is  his  own 
declaration  before  the  worlds  and  the  ages  of  this  broad  universal 
fact  as  to  the  race.  Conceived  of  as  responsible  moral  agents, 
they  are  sinners. 

In  this  point  of  view  we  readily  see  why  "  confessing  our  sin" 
is  the  first  condition  of  being  saved  through  Christ.  If  we  say 
— "  1  have  no  sin;  "  "I  have  not  sinned  ;  "  we  charge  God  Avith 
slandering  our  moral  character;  and  what  is  more  still,  with 
throwing  away  the  life  and  blood  of  his  Son  needlessly,  for  a  thing 
of  nought — for  no  worthy  consideration — for  nothing  better  than 
a  vain  display  of  uncalled-for  and  falsely  j)rofessed  benevolence  ! 
Do  those  who  will  not  confess  themselves  sinners  consider  how 
cruelly  they  insult  God,  and  how  fearfully  they  abuse  his  love  and 
outrage  his  patience  ! 

As  to  those  who  "confess  their  sins" — implying  not  the  con- 
fessing of  the  fact  only,  but  of  the  wrong  and  guilt  of  it  also — 

God  is  both   "faithful   and  just  to  forgive." In  what  sense 

"both  faithful  and  just"  ?  "  Faithful"  as  having  promised,  and 
therefore  as  in  good  faith  fulfilling;  "just,"  as  doing  a  righteous 
thing — a  thing  which  he  can  righteously  do  by  reason  of  the  pro- 
visions made  in  the  atoning  death  of  Christ. 

Is  there  perhaps  a  slight  antithesis  between  these  words,  "  faith- 
ful" and  "just,"  of  this  sort?  He  can  in  good  faith  forgive  and 
Tjct  be  just  to  himself  and  to  the  demands  of  a  perfectly  holy  law 
— a  wonderful  achievement — to  make  forgiveness  consistent  with 
justice  ;  the  blotting  out  of  sin  and  the  free  pardon  of  the  sin- 
ner, consistent  with  a  law  which  declares — "The  soul  that  sinneth, 
it  shall  die."     This  is  what  God  does  when  in  both  faithfulness 

and  justice  he  forgives  the  penitent  who  confesses  his  sin. 

By  such  a  system  of  forgiveness  and  moral  cleansing  through 
the  blood  of  Christ,  God  has  prepared  the  way  for  pardoned  sin- 
ners to  come  into  fellowship  with  the  Father  and  with  his  Son 
Jesus  Christ. 


S24     •  ^      I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  II. 


CHAPTER    II. 

Much  in  the  usual  stj-lc  of  epistolary  ■writing,  John  passes 
from  one  subject  to  another  as  new  thoughts  come  to  his  mind, 
all  however  converging  to  the  one  great  endeavor — "that  ye  sin 
not" — and  particularly  that  ye  may  not  be  self-deceived  as  to 
really  knowing  God ;  that  ye  may  love  the  brethren  and  not  love 
the  world,  nor  be  misled  by  those  who  deny  Christ,  etc. 

1.  ]My  little  cliiklren,  these  things  write  I  unto  you,  that 
ye  §in  not.  And  if  any  man  sin,  we  have  an  advocate  with 
the  Father,  Jesus  Christ  the  righteous: 

2.  And  he  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins:  and  not  for 
curs  only,  hut  also  for  tJie  sins  of  the  whole  world. 

"Little  children" — not  young  in  years  absolutely,  but  only 
relatively  to  the  writer,  that  very  aged  patriarch  who  belonged  to 

a  past  generation. The   great   purpose  which  lay  ever  Avarm 

upon  his  heart  is  here  put  in  simplest,  fewest  words — "  tJiat  ye 
niii  not."  If  he  might  only  jireserve  them  all  from  sin — sin  that 
worst  evil  that  could  befall  them — that  worst  thing  they  could  do — 
that  fountain  of  all  the  ills  and  woes  of  mortals!  IIow  should  it 
be  resisted,  repelled,  watched  against,  hated,  avoided — with  ut- 
most endeavor  and  with  ever  wakeful  solicitude  ! 

But  if  under  subtle  or  overmastering  temptation,  or  through 
some  outburst  of  passion,  any  man  should  sin,  let  me  hasten  to  his 
relief  with  the  message — "We  have  an  Advocate  with  the  Father, 
Jesus  Christ  the  Righteous  One."  Through  Him  ja  may  find  ' 
salvation.  He  pleads  for  penitent  sinners  before  the  Father,  so 
tlmt  sin  can  be  forgiven.  No  man  need  sink  in  despair  under  a 
sense  of  unforgiven  sin. 

"Advocate"  (Gr.  Paracletos)  is  the  same  word  which  Jesus  ap- 
plied to  the  "Holy  Spirit  of  truth" — the  "Comforter"  (John  14: 
16,  17).  As  our  Advocate  with  the  Father,  Jesus  is  most  truly 
and  richly  a  Comforter  to  guilt-burdened  souls.  With  blended 
pity  and  love,  he  pleads  for  our  pardon  before  the  Father's  throne. 
Oh,  the  blessedness  of  such  a  Friend — an  Advocate  so  kind  to  us 
and  so  prevalent  in  intercession  before  the  Father ! 

"Jesus  the  EigJiieotis  One" — to  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  the 
sinless,  in  harmony  with  Heb.  7 :  26 :  "  For  such  an  High  Priest 
became  us — holy,  harmless,  undefiled,  separate  from  sinners;" — 
one  who  had  no  sins  of  his  own  to  preclude  him  from  audience 
before  Infinite  Purity.  To  the  same  purport  also  are  the  words 
of  Peter  (1  Peter  3:  18) — "Christ  once  suffered  for  sins,  thajtist 
for  the  unjust,  that  he  might  bring  us  to  God." 

"  He  is  the  propitiation,"  i.  e.  the  Propitiator — one  who  makes 
pi-opitiation ;  who  propitiates  in  the  sense  of  making  pardon  pos- 
sible to  a  righteous  God  consistently  with  all  due  regard  to  the 


I.  JOHN.— ciLvr.  II.  325 

l;nv  which  sin  has  broken  and  the  sacredness  of  the  penalty  which 
the  tvansji;ressor  has  both  incurred  and  deserved.  Strictly  the 
idea  is  not  that  Jesus  works  upon  the  pity  and  love  of  tlie  Father 
to  bring  him  over  from  wrath  to  mercy ;  but  rather  that  he  obvi- 
ates the  otherwise  stern  necessity  of  executing  the  penalty  of 
death  for  sin ;  and  thus  opens  the  way  for  the  safe  exercise  of  the 
jiardoning  power.  The  way  being  thus  opened,  the  infinite  love 
of  God  flows  out  naturallj''  and  mightily  in  the  freest  forgiveness  of 
the  penitent  who  accepts  for  himself  the  atonement  made  by  Jesus. 
In  this  sense  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Righteous  One,  makes 
propitiation  for  our  sins,  lie  prepares  the  way  for  the  Supreme 
Ruler  to  forgive  with  honor  to  himself,  with  safety  to  his  throne, 

with  joy  eternal  to  his  own  heart. Such  a  propitiation  is  in 

its  natui'e,  "not  for  our  sins  only"  (the  "our"  including  Chris- 
tians), "  but  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world."  In  its  relations 
to  law,  to  government,  to  pardon,  the  atonement  made  by  the 
blood  of  Christ  is  complete  in  itself  before  any  sinner  receives 
pardon  through  it,  and  whether  the  number  ever  forgiven  under 
it  be  less  or  greater.  It  would  have  been  an  atonement  ample  for 
all  the  world  even  if  no  sinner  ever  accepted  it.  In  its  nature  it 
was  large  enough,  broad  enough,  for  the  race;  and  therefore  really 
made  salvation  possible  for  «/Z  sinners  in  the  same  sense  in  which 
it  made  salvation  possible  for  one  sinner.  Hence  this  atonement 
is  properly  called  "  universal,"  "  unlimited" — not  meaning  or  im- 
plying by  these  Avords  that  it  saves  all  mankind,  for  in  itself,  con- 
sidered as  made  by  the  death  of  Christ,  it  saves  no  man.  The 
salvation  comes  only  upon  the  sinner's  believing.  Its  practical 
results  of  real  salvation  reach  never  a  soul  till  that  soul  accepts 
it  for  himself  with  jjenitence  for  sin  and  humble  faith  in  this 
atoning  blood  as  his  ground  of  hope  for  pardon. 

Every  thoughtful  reader  will  see  that  it  is  becausie  Christ's  atone- 
ment is  really  made  for  all  and  oifered  to  all,  that  the  guilt  of 
every  sinner  who  refuses  it  becomes  so  great,  and  W' ithal,  so  neces- 
sarily and  so  justly  fatal  to  all  possibility  of  salvation.  Because 
sinners  "deny  the  Lord  who  bought  them,"  they  bring  on  them- 
selves swift  and  sure  destruction.  They  need  not  die — if  only 
they  would  come  to  Jesus  and  take  the  offered  life;  but  oh, 
if  they  zvill  not  hace  life,  then  what  but  destruction,  with  no 
remedy ! 

3.  And  hereby  we  do  know  tliat  we  know  liini,  if  we  keep 
Ills  commandments. 

4.  He  that  saith,  I  knoAV  him,  and  keepeth  not  his  com- 
mandments, is  a  liar,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  him. 

5.  But  whoso  keepeth  his  word,  in  him  verily  is  the  love 
of  God  perfected:  hereby  knoAv  we  that  we  are  in  him. 

6.  He  that  saith  he  abideth  in  him  ought  himself  also  so 
to  walk,  even  as  he  Avalked. 

We  need  some  reliable  test  of  true  piety  that  we  may  judge 


326  I.  JOHN.— CHAr.  II. 

safely  either  of  ourselves  ov  of  others.  The  Christian  state,  the 
being  a  Christian,  John  puts  in  two  forms  of  statement:  they 
"  kncno  God;"  they  are  "in  God."  But  the  test  of  the  true 
Christian  is  one — Iceeping  God's  commandments.  Nothing  avails 
Avithout  this;  with  this,  nothing  more  is  needful.  According  to 
John  therefore,  this  is  the  sovereign,  certain,  and  only  necessary 

test. AVc  may  remember  that  Jesus  taught  the   same:   "My 

sheep  hear  my  voice;  they  follow  me."  "If  any  man  serve  me, 
let  him  follow  me."  "He  that  hath  my  commandments  and 
keepeth  them,  he  it  is  that  loveth  me."  "If  a  man  love  me  he 
will  keep  my  words,"  etc.,  etc. 

We  shall  the  better  understand  the  meaning  of  John  and  ap- 
preciate the  value  of  his  test  if  we  turn  for  a  moment  to  con- 
sider his    notion  of  what  true  piety  is. He  speaks  of  it  as 

Ixnoii'ing  God.  As  reported  to  us  in  John's  gospel,  Jesus  used 
this  word  "  knoio "  in  the  same  deep,  comprehensive  sense  : 
"  This  is  life  eternal,  that  they  might  knoio  Thee,  the  only  true 
God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  Thou  hast  sent"  (17:  3). Be- 
ginning at  the  bottom  of  the  subject  we  must  note  that  trne  re- 
ligion pertains  to  intelligent  heinr/s.  It  assumes  first  of  all  ca- 
pacities for  knowledge,  and  not  least,  for  an  actual  knoiolcdgc 
of  God.  Next,  it  assumes  that  this  knowledge  is  in  some  good 
degree  according  to  truth : — it  is  knowing  some  things  truly  of 
God. A  yet  more  vital  element  is,  that  the  human  soul  ad- 
justs itself  to  tliis  knoivledge ;  receives  it  approvingly,  joyfully; 
makes  it  welcome  ;  and  voluntarily  puts  itself  into  harmony  with 
the  legitimate  demands  which  such  knowledge  of  God  makes 
upon  his  intelligent  offspring.  For,  to  know  God  truly  is  to 
know  him  as  to  his  relations  to  ourselves :  i.  e.  to  know  him  as 
Creator,  Father,  Ruler.  To  adjust  ourselves  to  a  God  so  known 
— known  as  standing  in  such  relations  to  us — is  to  bow  our  will 
lovingly  to  his  will ;  is  to  render  to  him  the  homage  of  humble 
adoration,  praise,  and  especially,  or  perhaps  we  should  say  com- 
l)rehcnsively,  of  simple  obedience  to  all  his  revealed  will. 

But  some  one  will  ask — Are  there  not  thousands  in  Christian 
lands  who  know  much  about  God  and  yet  this  knowledge  lies 
in  their  souls  only  as  a  cold  abstraction  of  truth — a  specu- 
lation, a  theory  which  is  admitted  as  true  by  the  intelligence, 
but  its  moral  demands  are  resisted  by  the  will,  or,  if  not  con- 
sciously resisted,  are  at  least  ignored — practically  disowned  and  set 

at  nought? Manifestly  and  most  sadly,  this  must  be  admitted. 

If  it  be  still  inquired — Why  then  did  not  John  allow  for  this 
very  large  exception  to  his  general  law  and  forbear  to"  assume 
without  qualification  that  "knowing  God"  well  defines  true 
piety  because  it  means  and  implies  it— this  may  be  said  in  ex- 
planation and  defense  of  his  usage  of  words. (1.)  Ordinarily, 

men  do  not   learn  much  about   God  unless  they  love  him    and 

love  to  learn  of  him. (2.)  Legitimately,  knoAving  God  begets 

— at  least  tends  powerfully  to  produce — true  love  to  God.  Hence 
an  effect  so-natui-al  may  be  embraced  under  the  same  word  used 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  II.  327 

for  the  cause,  i.  e.  knowing  God  can-ics  with  it  both  the  knowl- 
edge (intellectually  considered),  and  its  natural  fruits — the  love 

and  obedience  it  begets. (3.)  This  closely  connected  result — 

love  following  ujton  knowledge — will  be  the  more  sure  if  the 
e.xtcrnal  surroundings,  the  forces  of  the  times,  are  such  as  to 
rule  out  all  inducement  to  get  the  theory  of  God  unless  the 
heart  is  ready  to  yield  to  his  moral  demands.  A  somewhat  vig- 
orous persecution  of  those  who  know  God — who  study  and  obey 
him — will  tend  to  sift  out  the  ranks  of  his  pupils  and  exclude 
from  his  school  all  save  those  who  listen  to  the  moral  demands 
of  such  knowledge,  and  therefore  study  God  for  the  sake  of 
loving  and  obeying  him. Note  now  that  such  were  the  ex- 
ternal circumstances  when  Jesus  lived  and  John  wrote.  Hence 
in  their  use  of  language  they  might  naturally  assume  what  was 
then  ordinarily  the  fact — that  those  who  knew  God  intellectu- 
ally gave  him  their  heart's  love  morally. 

Let  us  be  careful  to  consider  that  in  the  sense  of  Jesus  and 
of  John,  to  "know  God"  is  to  open  one's  heart  to  this  knowl- 
edge, to  bow  one's  will  sweetly  to  its  moral  demands,  to  bring 
the  soul  voluntarily  and  with  earnest  endeavor  into  fullest  har- 
mony with  all  we  learn  of  God.  Thus  the  crucial  test  of  really 
knowing  God  is  that  we  honestly  obey  his  commandments.  This 
test  we  can  apply  (if  so  we  will)  to  ourselves  :  we  can  also  with 
a  fair  measure  of  certainty  apply  it  to  other  men. 

Kecurring  to  our  passage  let  us  note  that  in  v.  3  the  Greek 
tense  requires — "Hereby  we  know  that  we  have  Jxiioicii  him" 
— though  probably  this  aorist  tense  should  include  the  present 
also; — have  knoivii  and  still  Inoiv.  "If  we  keep  his  command- 
ments" involves  both  a  previous  conversion  and  a  present  Chris- 
tian  life. According    to  v.  5,  keeping  God's   word  develops 

the  love  of  God  in  human  souls  to  its  perfection.  It  is  the  way 
to  reach  this  great  and  glorious  attainment — perfect  love.  The 
simple  spirit  of  obedience,  diligently  cultivated,  steadfastly  main- 
tained, made    supreme  over  all  the  moral  activities  of  the  soul 

— this  brings  up  the  love  of  God  to  its  highest  development. 

The  law  of  the  Christian  life  therefore  is — "He  that  saith  he 
abideth  in  him  ought  himself  so  to  walk  as  Jesus  walked."  To 
be  in  Christ  as  branches  in  their  parent  vine  is  to  drink  only 
at  the  fountains  of  his  life — to  be  fed  from  the  springs  of  influ- 
ence and  vital  moral  force  which  flow  forth  from  him  to  his 
people.     Of  course  this  implies  that  we  live  and  Avalk  according 

to  the  model  left  us  in  his  earthly  life. Let  it  then  be  deemed 

forever  futile  and  vain  for  a  man  to  say  he  abides  in  Christ  un- 
less the  fruits  of  his  heart  in  the  outward  life  show  it. 

7.  Brethren,  I  write  no  new  commandment  xnito  you,  but 
an  old  commandment  Avliich  ye  had  from  the  beginning. 
The  old  commandment  is  the  word  which  jc  have  heard 
from  the  becrinninsc. 


328  I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  II. 

8.  Again,  a  new  commandment  I  write  unto  you,  which 
tiling  is  true  in  him  and  in  you :  because  the  darkness  is 
past,  and  the  true  light  now  shineth. 

What  I  have  written  here  of  "  keeping  his  commandments," 
and  accounting  this  the  only  evidence  of  knowing  God  and  of 
being  in  him,  is  nothing  new,  but  is  rather  the  old  doctrine  of 
my  gospel  history,  Avell  known  to  you  from  the  beginning  of  your 
Christian  life,  or  of  the  gospel  age.  Eut  again  I  write  to  you 
what  may  be  regarded  as  a  new  commandment  only  inasmuch  as 
it  presents  this  old  truth  in  new  aspects  and  new  applications  ; 
for  with  the  march  of  time,  truth  receives  new  developments;  the 
old  darkness  disappears  and  clearer  light  shines. This  antith- 
esis between  the  old  command  and  the  new  seems  somewhat  ob- 
scure ;  yet  probably  the  new  aspects  referred  to  are  those  which 
appear  in  vs.  9-11 — and  perhaps  onward;  e.  g.  that  hatred  to 
one's  brother  nullifies  all  proof  of  piety,  for  hatred  is  a  sure  char- 
acteristic of  moral  darkness — the  ungodly  state,  as  love  is  of 
light — the  really  Christian  life.* 

9.  He  that  saith  he  is  in  the  light,  and  hateth  his  brother, 
is  in  darkness  even  until  now. 

10.  He  that  loveth  his  brother  abidethin  the  light,  and 
tliere  is  none  occasion  of  stumbling  in  him. 

11.  But  he  that  hateth  his  brother  is  in  darkness,  and 
walketh  in  darkness,  and  knoweth  not  whither  he  goeth, 
because  that  darkness  hath  blinded  his  eyes. 

Probably  there  were  asperities  and  alienations  of  feeling  among 
professed  brethren  against  which  John  intended  these  verses 
should  bear.  Let  such  unloving  professors  of  religion  understand 
that  their  spirit  is  of  earthly  darkness,  and  not  of  gospel  light; 
i«  of  the  world,  not  of  Christ;  that  they  know  not  the  true  light, 
but  abide  still  in  the  old  darkness  of  their  ungodly  life.  Doubtless 
if  such  men  suppose  themselves  Christians,  they  are  blind   and 

self-deceived. lie  who  walks  in  love  abides  in  the   light,  and 

will  not  make  cither  himself  or  his  fellow-men   stumble  in  the 
Christian  life. 

12.  I  write  unto  you,  little  children,  because  your  sins 
are  forgiven  you  for  his  name's  sake. 

13.  I  write  unto  you,  fathers,  because  ye  have  known  him 
that  is  from  the  beginning.  I  write  unto  you,  young  men, 
because  ye  have  overcome  the  Avicked  one.  I  wTite  unto 
you,  little  children,  because  ye  have  known  the  Father. 

14.  I  have  written  unto  you,  fathers,  because  ye  have 
known  him  that  is  from  the  beginning.    I  have  written  unto 

*The  corrected  text  at  the  close  of  v.  7  omits  "from  the  begin- 
nins" — a  ehange  which  leaves  the  sense  the  same. 


I.  JOHN.— ciiAr.  II.  329 

you,  young  men,   because  ye  are  strong,  and  the  word  of 
God  abideth  in  you,  and  ye  have  overcome  the  wicked  one. 

To  three  classes  distint^uishecl  by  age,  viz,  children,  fathers, 
and  young  men,  he  writes  now  and  has  written  before.  In  those 
verses  he  gives  the  special  reasons  why  he  has  written.  The 
reasons  for  both  the  present  and  the  former  writing  scenr  to  be 
substantially  the  same,  the  slightly  varied  expressions  amounting 
to  much  the  same  in  thought: — to  little  children  because  they  are 
forgiven  through  Christ,  or  otherwise  put — "  have  known  the 
Father;"  to  the  fathers  in  the  church  because  they  had  "known 
him  who  is  from  the  beginning,"  of  whom  in  his  gospelJohn  had 
said — "In  the  beginning  was  the  Word ;  "  to  young  men  because 
they  had  overcome  Satan ;  were  strong  in  the  vigor  of  youth  and 
in  the  freshness  of  their  Christian  life  through  having  God's  word 
abiding  in  their  hearts.  He  assumes  it  to  be  a  glorious  achieve- 
ment for  young  men  at  the  age  when  the  world,  the  flesh,  and 
the  devil  are  perhaps  most  seductive  and  powerful,  to  have  over- 
come the  devil  and  to  put  all  their  youthful  vigor  into  Christian 
work  and  the  Christian  life. 

In  the  last  clause  of  v.  13  (the  second  address  to  little  chil- 
dren) the  corrected  text  gives,  not  "I  write,"  but  "I  have  writ- 
ten"— a  change  which  makes  the  order  complete — each  of  the 
three   classes    being  named  twice;  once  as  addressed  noAv;  and 

again,    as   having   been  written    to  previously. Whether  the 

former  writing  refers  to  his  gospel;  to  some  other  epistle;  or  to 
the  preceding  part  of  this — is  neither  very  certain  nor  very  im- 
portant. 

15.  Love  not  tlie  world,  neither  the  things  that  are  in  the 
world.  If  any  man  love  the  world,  the  love  of  the  Father 
is  not  in  him. 

16.  For  all  that  is  in  the  Avorld,  the  lust  of  the  flesh,  and 
the  lust  of  the  eyes,  and  the  pride  of  life,  is  not  of  the 
Father,  but  is  of  the  world. 

17.  And  the  world  passeth  away,  and  the  lust  thereof: 
but  he  that  doeth  the  will  of  God  abideth  forever. 

Naturally  John's  allusion  to  the  moral  victory  achieved  by 
young  men  suggested  these  words  of  admonition  as  to  the  chief 

dangers  of  the  Christian  life. The  love  of  the  Father  and  the 

love  of  the  world  are  naturally  incompatible  because  both  say, 
"Give  me  thy  heart,"  and  "  no  man  can  serve  two  masters" — es- 
pecially two  so  antagonistic  as  God  and  Mammon. The  analy- 
sis and  classification  of  the  different  forms  of  worldly  good  (as  in 
V.  16) — "the  lust  of  the  flesh,  the  lust  of  the  eyes,  and  the  pride 
(if  life" — are  exceedingly  useful  as  indicating  in  general  what  is 
meant  by  "the  world"  and  by  "loving  the  world,"  while  at  the 
same  time  it  is  not  wise  to  regard  this  classification  as  exhaust- 
ive.    There   may  be  yet  other   forms  of  worldly  good  not  leas 


330  I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  II. 

hostile  to  loving  God;  not  less  cnsnaving  therefore  and  ruinous. 
The  love  of  money  is  not  named  here.  Let  no  one  forget  that 
Jesus  put  Mammon  among  the  chief  enemies  of  human  souls,  and 
that  Paul  said,  "The  love  of  money  is  the  root  of  all  evil" — (1 
Tim.  6:  10).  John  may  have  had  reasons  for  placing  the  points 
named  here  in  the  foreground — supposably  because  these  were 
then  the  forms  of  worldly  pleasure  which  most  imperiled  the 
young.  But  John  would  justly  rebuke  us  if  we  should  infer  from 
his  not  naming  the  love  of  money  that  he  made  no  account  of 
that  form  of  world-loving. 

Of  every  form  of  worldly  good  he  would  say — It  is  short-lived, 
fleeting,  sure  to  pass  swiftly  away.  While  yet  one  is  saying  to 
himself — "I  have  gained  it;  behold  what  a  treasure!"  lo,  it  is 
gone !  Or,  what  is  equally  fatal,  the  pleasure-lover  himself  passes 
away,  and  is  no  more  ! — That  John  had  this  in  mind  may  be  in- 
dicated by  his  contrast:  "  He  that  doeth  the  will  of  God  abideth 
forever."  In  a  very  precious  sense  he  never  dies.  Never  is  he 
torn  away  fi'om  all  he  loves.  It  is  only  the  miserable  worldling 
who  "  is  driven 'away  in  his  wickedness."  Oh,  how  does  the  por- 
tion of  the  righteous  rise  in  its  preciousness  and  brighten  in 
glory  as  the  j^ears  roll  away  and  as  the  end  of  human  life  draws 
near ! 

18.  Little  children,  it  is  tlie  last  time:  and  as  ye  have 
heard  that  antichrist  shall  come,  even  now  are  there  many- 
antichrists;  whereby  we  know  that  it  is  the  last  time. 

"The  last  time" — in  the  Greek,  "the  last  Jiorir."  The  ques- 
tion will  arise — Did  John  suppose  the  days  then  passing  to  be  the 
last  hours  of  time  ?  Could  he  have  been  so  much  mistaken,  and 
yet  be  writing  letters  under  inspiration  ? 

To  meet  these  questions  fundamentally,  let  us  group  to- 
gether the  parallel  passages  of  the  New  Testament  which  will  give 
us  the  current  ideas  of  the  age  and  the  then  current  usage  of 
these  and  kindred  terms.  "Hath  in  these  last  days  spoken  to  us 
by  his  Son"  (Heb.  1:  2); — "  Christ  was  manifested  in  these  last 
times  for  you  "  (1  Pet.  1 :  20)  ; — "  It  shall  come  to  pass  in  the  last 
dai/s,  saith  God,  I  will  pour  out  my  Spirit"  (Acts  2:  17) — sup- 
posed to  be  fulfilled  at  the  Great  Pentecost ; — "  Now  the  Spirit 
speaketh  expressly  that  in  the  latter  times  some  shall  depart  from 
the  faith"  (1  Tim.  4:1);  "In  the  last  days  perilous  times  shall 
come  "  (2  Tim.  3  :  1)  ; — "Remember  the  words  spoken  before  by 
the  apostles  .  .  .  how  they  told  you  there  should  be  mockers 
in  the  last  time"  (Jude  17,  18); — "These  things  are  written  for 
our  admonition  iipontohom  the  ends  of  the  world  are  come" — i.  e. 
upon  whom  the  two  ends  of  the  ages  meet — the  former  age 
coming  to  its  close  and  the  latter  age  beginning  (I  Cor.  10:  11); 
• — "Now  once  in  the  end  of  the  uwrld  hath  Christ  appeared  to 
put  away  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself"  (Heb.  9:  26). 

The  careful  reader  of  these  passages  will  see  that  the  italicised 


L  JOHN.— CHAP.  II.  331 

f)hi"asos  describe  tlio  Messianic  ap;c,  the  period  commencing  with 
lis  incarnation  and  including  all  that  was  to  be  subsequent. 
The  Jews  divided  all  time  into  two  ages  {'^worlds"  they  some- 
times call  them) — the  age  before  Christ  and  the  age  after — 
much  as  the  Christian  world  make  the  birth  of  Christ  the  divid- 
ing line  of  time,  reckoning  what  preceded  in  one  table,  and  all 
that  follows  in  another.  In  dividing  time  thus  into  two  great 
ages,  neither  the  Jewish  world  nor  the  Christian  express  any 
opinion  as  to  the  length  of  the  last  age.  We  agree  to  call  it  the 
last  days,  the  last  age,  committing  ourselves  to  no  theory  as  to  its 
duration.  Any  further  consideration  of  questions  in  reference  to 
the  views  of  the  apostles  respecting  Christ's  future  comings,  will 
come  fitly  into  my  Excursus  on  this  subject  in  the  Appendix. 

The  word  "  antichrist "  is  peculiar  to  John  and  occurs  only 
in  these  Epistles  (2:  18,  22,  and  4:  3,  and  2  Eps.  7).  The  refer- 
ence to  antichrist  in  the  verse  before  us  seems  to  contemplate 
some   definite   individual ;  but  in  v.  22  aiuj  one  who   denies   the 

Father  and   the   Son   is   an   antichrist. "  Ye  have  heard  that 

antichrist  shall  come  " — for  Jesus  had  forewarned  his  people 
(Matt.  24:  11,  24)  of  the  coming  of  "false  Christs  and  false 
prophets,"  and  so  also  had  Paul  in  speaking  to  the  elders  of  the 
Ephesian  church  (Acts  20:  29,  30)  (where  John  was  writing)  and 
also  in  writing  to  Timothy,  then  at  Ephesus  (1  Tim.  4:  1,  and  2 
Tim.  3:  1).  These  forewarnings  designated  the  time  as  in  the 
latter  days.  Jesus  placed  false  Christs  and  prophets,  in  time, 
shortly  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

19.  They  -went  out  from  us,  but  tliey  wore  not  of  us ;  for 
if  they  had  been  of  us,  they  would  no  doubt  have  continued 
■with  us  :  but  they  went  out,  that  they  might  be  made  mani- 
fest that  they  Avere  not  all  of  us. 

Some  of  these  antichrists  were  apostates  from  the  Christian 
faith.  John  thinks  it  important  to  show  how  men  once  supposed 
to  be  real  Christians  might  become  apostate.  He  explains  it 
thus :  They  never  toere  true  Christians.  If  they  had  been  they 
would  have  remained  true  to  Christ ;  but  they  went  out,  not  be- 
cause they  wished  to  show  that  they  never  belonged  there,  but 
because  God  sought  to  show  it.  We  may  assume  that  John  re- 
membered what  Jesus  had  said  so  very  strongly  and  what  him- 
self had  recorded  so  fully  (.John  10:  26-29) :  "Sly  sheep  hear  my 
voice,  and  I  know  them,  and  they  follow  me :  I  give  them  eternal 
life  ;  they  shall  never  perish ;  none  shall  ever  pluck  them  from 
my  hand,"  etc.  It  is  not  strange  therefore  that  he  should  pause 
at  this  point  to  explain  how  the  case  of  these  apostates  can  be 
harmonized  with  those  strong  words  of  Jesus  as  to  keeping  all 
his  sheep  safely  unto  eternal  life. 

20.  But  ye  have  an  unction  from  the  Holy  One,  and  ye 
know  all  things. 


332  I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  II. 

In  the  best  manuscripts  the  ]ast  clause  of  this  verse  stands— 
not  "ye  know  all  things,"  but  "ye  all  know" — the  word  "all" 
qualifying  the  persons — not  the  things.  Ye  all  have  Christian 
knowledge. 

"  Unction,"  i.  e.  chrism,  or  the  anointing,  may  be  a  tacit  allu- 
sion to  the  name  Christ — the  anointed  One;  but  more  probably 
rests  on  the  ancient  Hebrew  usage  of  anointing  priests  and  kings 
for  their  sacred  functions — which  anointing  became  an  emblem 
of  divine  illumination  for  their  work.  The  word  passed  down 
into  the  Christian  age  to  signify  the  teaching  of  the  Spirit  as 
promised  by  Jesus — "He  shall  teach  you  all  things,"  etc.  Thus 
taught  by  the  Spirit  they  had  such  Christian  knowledge  that  they 
could  detect  these  antichrists  and  withstand  their  seductions. 

21.  I  have  not  written  unto  you  because  ye  know  not  the 
truth,  but  because  ye  know  it,  and  that  no  lie  is  of  the 
truth. 

22.  Who  is  a  liar  but  he  that  denieth  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ  ?  He  is  antichrist,  that  denieth  the  Father  and  the 
Son. 

Fortunately,  John  could  have  confidence  in  the  brethren  to 
whom  he  wrote  that  their  knowledge  of  gospel  truth  would  be 
equal  to  this  emergency.  They  must  see  that  to  deny  the  Messi- 
ahship  of  Jesus  would  be  fatal  to  the  whole  gospel  scheme.  This 
being  denied,  nothing  remains.  For,  to  deny  this  denies  both  the 
Father  and  the  Son.  We  have  no  God  left  to  love  and  to  worship, 
for  God  the  Father  has  most  fully  indorsed  the  mission  of  Jesus 
his  Son.  If  this  is  not  reliable,  we  have  lost  God,  and  virtually 
have  no  God — Father,  Son,  or  Spirit — on  whom  we  can  rely. 

23.  Whosoever  denieth  the  Son,  the  same  hath  not  the 
Father :  \hut\  he  that  acknoidedgeth  the  Son  hath  the  Father 
also. 

In  our  English  version  the  last  clause  of  this  verse  is  put  in 
Italics,  indicating  doubt  of  its  being  genuine.  There  seems  to  be 
not  the  least  occasion  for  this  doubt.  The  best  manuscripts  con- 
tain it,  and  the  course  of  thought  with  this  clause  included  is  en- 
tirely in  harmony  with  John's  habit.  To  deny  the  Son  is  to  lose 
the  Father;  to  confess  the  Son  retains  to  us  the  Father — two  prop- 
ositions mutually  correlated  to  each  other.  Men  must  hold  to  the 
Father  and  to  the  Son  both  and  equally,  or  must  lose  both.  It  is 
impossible  to  retain  the  Father  after  having  rejected  the  Son. 

24.  Let  that  therefore  abide  in  you,  which  ye  have  heard 
from  the  beginning.  If  that  which  ye  have  heard  from  the 
beginning  shall  remain  in  you,  ye  also  shall  continue  in  the 
Son,  and  in  the  Father. 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  II.  333 

25.  And  this  is  the  promise  that  he  hath  promised  us,  even 
eternal  life. 

Hold  fast,  therefore,  to  the  doctrine  of  Christ  which  ye  have 
heard  from  the  first.  So  doing,  ye  will  continue  in  the  Son  and 
in  the  Father ;  and  the  promised  hlessings  of  this  gospel — that 
eternal  life  in  which  all  culminate — shall  be  your  portion. 

2G.  These  things  have  I  written  unto  you  concerning  them 
that  seduce  you. 

27.  But  the  anointing  which  ye  have  received  of  him 
abideth  in  you,  and  ye  need  not  that  any  man  teach  you : 
but  as  the  same  anointing  teacheth  you  of  all  things,  and  is 
truth,  and  is  no  lie,  and  even  as  it  hath  taught  you,  ye  shall 
abide  in  him. 

All  these  things  1  have  written  to  warn  you  against  being  se- 
duced from  the  truth  as  to  Christ. "Anointing"  (v.  27)  (Greek) 

is  the  word  translated  "  unction"  (v.  20),  and  refers  here  as  there 
to  the  truth  taught  them  by  the  Spirit.  In  this  teaching  John 
has  unlimited  confidence — that  they  have  it;  that  it  is  pure  truth; 
and  will  be  all  they  need  to  know  concerning  Jesus. 

28.  And  now,  little  children,  abide  in  him;  that,  when 
he  shall  appear,  we  may  have  confidence,  and  not  be 
ashamed  before  him  at  his  coming. 

"  That  if  he  shall  appear" — "  if"  being  a  more  accurate  trans- 
lation than  "  when." "  Not  be   ashamed,"  should  rather  be — 

not  be  29?i^  to  shame  ;  for  in  that  august  and  glorious  hour,  it  is 
not  supposable  that  perishing  mortals  will  be  ashamed  of  Jesus, 
coming  in  his  glory.  The  one  only  thing  they  have  to  fear  is  that 
Jesus  may  be  ashamed  of  them,  and  they  be  put  to  shame  before 
him. 

But  what  shall  be  said  of  this  supposition — that  Jesus  may  pos- 
sibly appear  ? This  at  least — that  such  a  supposition  is  always 

in  order — never  can  be  out  of  place. Also  this  farther  : — that 

if  the  time  when  lay  in  a  sense  uncertain  before  John's  mind,  and 
he  could  not  be  sure  but  it  might  be  really  near,  there  would  be 
the  greater  propriety  in  making  this  supposition.  As  to  the  opin- 
ions of  the  apostles  on  this  time-question,  my  views  have  been 
expressed  and  referred  to  sufiicicntly. As  to  the  moral  bear- 
ings of  this  coming,  nothing  could  be  more  fearful  than  to  be 
found  out  of  Christ — not  abiding  in  him — when  that  august  day 
shall  break  upon  the  world. 

29.  If  ye  know  that  he  is  righteous,  ye  know  that  every 
one  that  doeth  righteousness  is  born  of  him. 

"  He  is  righteous  " — but  who  is  meant  by  "  he"  ?     The  nearest 
expressed  antecedent  is  "7ie"  who  is  to  appear — Jesus.     Yet  in 
15 


334  I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  III. 

the  subsequent  context,  "born  of  him"  should  refer  to  God,  the 
more  so  because  sons  so  born  are  in  the  next  verse  spoken  of  as 
"  sons  of  God."  But  the  sense  is  essentially  the  same  whether 
"  he  "  refers  to  Christ  or  to  God. 

If  ye  know  that  God  is  righteous  ye  know  that  the  righteous 
ones  among  men  are  his  children,  born  of  him.  Nothing  short 
of  such  a  new  birth  insures  the  fruits  of  intrinsic  righteousness 
of  character  and  life.  Jt  is  pei'fectly  safe  to  assume  and  affirm 
this,  for,  apart  from  the  grace  that  regenerates  human  souls,  there 
is  no  essential  righteousness  in  human  character. 


ool^c^f 


CHAPTER   III. 

The  central  doctrine  in  this  precious  chapter  is  that  being  born 
of  God  reveals  itself  in  an  unsinning,  loving  life  in  this  world, 
and  in  the  consummation  of  purity  and  blessedness  in  the  next. 

1.  Behold,  what  manner  of  love  the  Father  hath  bestowed 
upon  us,  that  we  should  he  called  the  sons  of  God :  there- 
fore the  world  knoweth  us  not,  because  it  knew  him  not. 

It  will  aid  the  reader  toward  the  full  sense  of  this  verse  to  con- 
sider its  close  connection  with  the  verse  immediately  preceding, 
and  also  the  bearing  of  the  words  which  the  best  authorities  in- 
troduce after  the  clause — "  the  sons  of  God" — ^Viz.  "and  ice  are." 
These  words  suggest  that  the  marvel  of  God's  love  is  not  merely 
that  we  should  be  called  the  sons  of  God,  but  that  we  should  really 

be  such; — "and  we  are." Connecting  this  verse  with  the  one 

next  preceding,  we  have  this  line  of  thought :  Inasmuch  as  the  glory 
of  God's  character  is  its  infinite  righteousness,  it  follows  that 
every  one  who  practices  righteousness,  being  in  heart  and  life 
really  righteous,  shows  that  he  has  been  born  of  God.     He  has 

become  what  he  is  through  the  new  birth  by  the  Spirit. Then 

John  breaks  forth  in  this  expression  of  admiring  wonder:  "Be- 
hold what  manner  of  love  the  Father  hath  bestowed  on  us  that  we 
should  be  called  sons  of  God !  "  Yet  let  us  not  put  too  much  em- 
phasis on  the  word  "  called,"  as  if  John  thought  more  of  the 
honor  of  the  name  than  of  the  value  of  the  thing  which  the  name 
indicates.  Let  us  recall  the  fact  that  Hebrew  usage — most  marked 
in  Isaiah — employs  the  verb  "call"  to  signify  not  so  much  the 
name. as  the  reality.  Such  must  be  John's  meaning  here  not  only 
because  of  this  ancient  Hebrew  usage,  but  because  the  improved 
text  manifestly  gives  this  sense.  Behold  this  love  of  God — that 
he  should  not  only  call  us  sons,  but  that  we  should  really  be  sons ! 
The  great  love  shines  forth  in  the  new  birth  which  makes  us  sons 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  iir.  335 

in  spirit  and  in  life,  rather  than  in  the  gift  of  a  name  and  the 
honor  of  a  public  adoption  into  the  family  of  God.  The  intrinsic 
riojhteousncss  Avhich  makes  us  like  our  Heavenly  Father  is  more 
than  the  honor  of  the  recognized  parentage,  though  the  latter  be 
truly  groat  and  wonderful.  Oh,  the  ineffiible  love  manifested  from 
God  in  that  work  of  his  Spirit  which  transforms  human  hearts 
from  enmity  to  love — from  all  iniquity  into  the  spirit  of  intrinsic 
righteousness  like  that  of  God  himself!  In  what  fitting  words 
shall  we  celebrate  and  set  it  forth!  That  we — such  as  we  were 
by  nature  and  such  as  we  had  made  ourselves  by  sin — should  not 
only  be  called  but  should  in  fact  become  sons  of  God  by  being 
transformed  into  his  moral  image — what  less  can  we  say  of  this 
than  to  exclaim — Behold  what  manner  of  love  in  God  does  this 
reveal  1  Was  such  love  ever  known  elsewhere  in  all  the  universe? 
John  proceeds  to  say — No  wonder  that  men  of  the  world  knovf 
not  us,  for  they  know  not  God.  When  Jesus  came  among  men 
revealing  God,  their  eyes  were  blind,  their  souls  dark  as  to  this 
light  of  God.  Therefore  it  were  vain  to  expect  they  will  recog- 
nize us  as  God's  sons,  born  into  his  moral  image.  They  have  no 
eyes  (morally  speaking)  to  discern  such  moral  qualities.  Hating 
such  light,  the  power  of  a  bad  heart  to  darken  the  human  intelli- 
gence takes  fearful  effect  and  dooms  them  to  the  guilt  and  ruin 
of  moral  blindness.  Hence  Christians  may  walk  in  the  light  and 
the  love  of  Christ  through  life,  heirs  of  a  heavenly  kingdom  and 
yet  unknown;  nay  more,  with  heart  and  life  attuned  to  the  intrin- 
sic righteousness  of  God,  yet  as  really  unrecognized  of  the  world 
as  Jesus  himself  was  when  he  lived  before  human  eyes  unknown. 

2.  Beloved,  now  are  we  the  sons  of  God,  and  it  dotli  not 
yet  appear  what  we  shall  be  :  but  we  know  that,  Avhen  he  shall 
appear,  Ave  shall  be  like  him ;  for  we  shall  see  him  as  he  is. 

3.  And  every  man  that  hath  this  hope  in  him  purifieth 
himself,  even  as  he  is  pure. 

Beloved,  so  much  we  know  of  our  prerogatives  and  blessings ; 
but  of  the  fiir  more  glorious  future — ah,  indeed,  we  know  but  lit- 
tle! What  we  shall  be,  who  can  tell?  Yet  let  it  suffice  us  to 
know  that  whenever  Jesus  shall  appear,  coming  in  the  clouds  of 
heaven  to  take  his  risen  saints  into  their  promised  glory  with 
himself,  then  we  shall  be  like  Mm — all-glorious  and  all-pure  even 
as  he — "  for  we  shall  see  him  as  he  is."  The  moral  transforma- 
tion of  our  souls  into  his  image  will  be  made  absolutely  perfect 
then,  effected  under  the  normal  law  of  all  such  moral  changes,  viz. 
to  see,  to  study,  to  behold  admiringly,  lovingly,  itself  begets  the 
transformation.  Such  a  character  as  that  of  Jesus — so  SAveet,  so 
charming,  so  enrapturing — impresses  itself  perfectly  into  the 
souls  of  his  people.  It  molds,  transforms,  new  creates;  and  Ave 
become  like  him,  for  Ave  see  him,  not  dimly,  not  remotely,  not 
imperfectly,  not  Avith  the  least  false  shading;  but  perfectly  as  he 
is ;  so  that  the  impression  taken  up  by  our  own  Avilling,  loving 
souls  Avill  be  perfect  as  the  image  that  Ave  behold. 


336  I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  III. 

It  Avas  a  wise  hand  that  framed  and  hung  the  curtain  that  shades 
the  glories  of  the  heavenly  Avorld  somewhat  from  the  curious  up- 
turned eyes  on  this  hither  side.  No  doubt  it  is  well — none  can 
yet  say  how  well — that  "  it  doth  not  yet  appear  what  we  shall  be." 
Too  much  for  the  imagination  to  play  upon  might  divert  us  dan- 
gerously from  the  rougher  woi'k  and  the  sterner  realities  of  our 
earthly  Christian  life.  Of  the  wisdom  of  hiding  the  things  kept 
behind  this  curtain  we  can  not  perhaps  speak  altogether  posi- 
tively ;  but  of  the  wisdom  of  revealing  what  is  suffered  to  shine 
through  we  can  speak  somewhat  intelligently,  and  surely  ought 
to  speak  with  profoundest  admiration.  Oh  how  glorious  and  yet 
how  safe  to  be  assured  that  we  shall  be  like  Him  !  Like  Him 
whose  moral  image  is  infinite  beauty  and  unspeakable  glory;  like 
Him  whom  above  all  others  we  love,  revere  and  adore.  How 
should  this  satisfy  us,  though  we  were  to  know  nothing  else 
whatever  of  heaven !  Satisfy  ?  nay  more — how  should  it  ravish 
our  souls  with  ineifable  delight;  how  should  it  breathe  through 
our  whole  being  the  deep  repose  of  a  perfect  consummation! 
Surely  the  Christian  who  has  thrown  his  whole  heart  into  earnest 
endeavor  to  become  like  Christ,  with  watchfulness  and  prayer  and 
manifold  recastings,  laboriously  eliminating  the  evil  and  giving 
fresh  culture  to  the  good — Avill  know  how  to  appreciate  this  one 
blessed  assurance:  "We  shall  be  like  him,  for  we  shall  see  him 
as  he  is." 

In  this  very  line  of  thought  John  himself  would  lead  us ; — 
"  Every  man  that  hath  this  hope  in  Him  (Christ)  purifieth  him- 
self even  as  he  (Christ)  is  2;)ure."  Such  a  hope  of  being  in  the 
better  world  perfectly  like  Jesus  puts  the  soul  upon  its  utmost 
endeavors  to  reach  even  here  the  highest  attainable  conformity  to 
his  pure  character.  By  one  of  the  highest  and  best  laws  of  our 
being,  we  labor  spontaneously  to  prepare  ourselves  for  the  future 
responsibilities,  dignities,  labors  and  trusts  that  lie  befoi'e  us  in 
anticipation.  Adjusting  his  revelations  of  the  heavenly  world  to 
this  law  of  our  being,  God  puts  in  the  foreground  of  the  revealed 
heaven  these  two  great  facts — that  we  are  to  see  Jesus  as  he  is; 
and  that  we  are  to  become  perfectly  like  him.  Now  let  this  re- 
vealed knowledge  have  its  free  play  of  action  and  reaction  upon 
our  souls,  and  how  mightily  must  it  inspire  us  to  the  utmost  en- 
deavor to  perfect  this  maturity  of  Christian  character  even  here  ! 

The  sort  of  influence  we  shall  receive  from  the  heaven  we  think 
of  will  be  as  that  heaven  itself  A  fancied  sensual  paradise  Avill 
feed  sensuality.  A  heaven  of  scientific  pursuits  and  acquisitions 
might  very  naturally  stimulate  scientific  culture.  Too  much  place 
given  to  tlae  social  side  of  our  nature  as  to  be  developed  among 
our  fellow-men  would  be  in  danger  of  toning  down  the  grand  as- 
pirations which  John  contemplates.  But  to  put  the  vision  of  Je- 
sus as  he  is,  and  the  becoming  verily  like  him,  not  only  into  the 
foreground  but  over  the  whole  ground  of  our  view — this  is  at 
once  wholesome  in  its  perfect  safety,  and  in  its  very  nature  is 
erandlv  siiblimc  ! 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  in.  337 

If  our  ideal  heaven  -were  such  a  heaven  as  this,  and  if  all  our 
hopes  of  heaven  were  these  hopes  of  seeing  Jesus  as  he  is,  and 
of  being  absolutely  like  him,  the  mistaken  hopes  and  the  failures 
of  the  hoping,  to  reach  heaven,  would  be  indefinitely  less,  and 
the  moral  power  of  anticipating  heaven  would  be  indefinitely 
greater  and  purer. 

4.  "Whosoever  commltteth  siu  tra.nsgre.ssetli  also  the  law: 
for  sin  is  the  transgresdou  of  the  law. 

5.  And  ye  know  that  he  was  manifested  to  take  away  our 
sins:  and  in  hina  is  no  sin. 

6.  Whosoever  abideth  in  him  sinueth  not :  whosoever  siu- 
neth  hath  not  seen  him,  neither  known  him. 

The  connection  of  these  verses  with  those  which  precede  should 
be  carefully  noted — viz.  that  the  spirit  of  the  Christian  life,  his 
sonship,  his  intrinsic  righteousness,  his  asjiirations  to  be  like  Je- 
sus— are  all  fundamentally  anti-sin — there  being  no  sympathy 
whatever  but  the  most  repellant  contrariety  between  such  a 
Christian  and  the  sinner  whom  he  here  contemplates. 

'JMie  noticeable  thing  in  v.  4  is  the  prominence  given  to  the 
fact  that  sin  is  against  law.  It  would  seem  that  these  proposi- 
tions— the  doer  of  sin  practices  law-breaking :  for  sin  is  break- 
ing law — must  allude  to  some  heresy  then  current,  supposably 
one  which  ignored  the  moral  law,  pei'haps  denied  its  bindin"- 
force,  and  thus  virtually  broke  down  God's  standard  of  human 
duty  and  obligation.  Of  this,  however,  we  can  not  speak  posi- 
tively. 

It  deserves  consideration  whether  the  word  John  uses,  transla- 
ted "  transgression  of  the  law  "  *  should  not  be  taken  in  the  sense 
of  lawlessness — the  lawless  spirit — in  which  sense  he  would  affirm 
that  the  doer  of  sin  manifests  lawlessness;  that  the  chief  clement 
of  guilt  in  all  sin  is  the  lawless  spirit  which  it  involves — the  reck- 
less disregard  of  God's  authority;  the  deliberate  repellinff  of 
God's  standard  of  human  duty.  This  would  evince  a  heart  in 
hostile  and  even  disdainful  attitude  toward  God.  In  this  aspect 
of  sin,  the  difficulties  of  the  passage  mainly  if  not  wholly  disap- 
pear. For,  with  such  a  spirit  of  sin,  the  Christian  life  is  utterly 
contrasted.  There  can  be  no  difficulty  in  maintaining  that  such 
sin  must  be  unknown  in  the  true  Christian  life,  and  is  utterly  in- 
consistent Avith  it.  His  deficiencies  and  short-comings  never 
reach  the  point  of  defiant  lawlessness.  He  may  sin  inadvertently, 
or  through  sudden  impulses  of  temptation,  or  in  f\illing  short  of 
the  highest  and  purest  possible  devotion  to  Christ;  but  his  sin  is 
not  lawlessness. 

Jesus  was  made  manifest  in  human  flesh  (as  ye  all  knoAv)  for 

♦  Anomia. 


338  I.  JOHN.— ciiAr.  III. 

the  gi'eat  purpose  of  taking  away  sin,*  and  was  himself  sinless. 
Hence  his  example  bears  with  its  solid  force  against  sinning. 
The  great  aim  of  his  mission  to  earth  hears  in  the  same  direc- 
tion.    Let  his  people  remember  all  this  forever. Consequently 

whosoever  abideth  in  him,  as  the  branch  in  its  parent  vine,  draw- 
ing his  life-forces  from  Jesus  himself,  does  not  sin.  Such  minis- 
trations of  spiritual  life-power,  beget  the  fruit  of  holiness,  not  of 
sin.  The  man  Avho  sins  makes  it  plain  that  he  has  no  just  spirit- 
ual apprehensions  of  Jesus — surely  does  not  in  the  gospel  sense, 
"  abide  in  him."  The  same  doctrine  is  put  in  v.  9  below  in  terms 
somewhat  differing,  but  in  sense  the  same. 

The  only  really  difficult  question  involved  in  these  passages  re- 
spects the  sort  of  sins  of  Avhich  some,  not  to  say  many  who 
give  unquestioned  proof  of  piet}'',  confess  themselves  from  time  to 
time — or  perhaps  all  the  time,  guilty.  Not  that  they  confess  to 
a  lawless  spirit;  not  that  they  disown  obligation  or  deny  Christ; 
not  that  they  make  up  their  mind  to  forsake  his  service  and  sell 
themselves  to  work  iniquity :  no ;  but  they  confess  to  falling  be- 
low their  own  standard  of  duty  ;  to  inadvertent  transgressions ;  to 
deficient  zeal  and  love.  Vvliat  shall  be  said  of  such  confessed  sin 
in  the  case  of  men  apparently  true  folloAvers  of  Christ? 

Shall  we  say  that  John  uses  the  words  "  sin"  and  "sinner" 
in  the  strong  emphatic  vsense  which  is  so  common  in  the  gospel 
histories,  a  sense  involving  open,  flagrant  immoralities — e.  g. 
"Behold  a  woman  in  the  city  who  was  a  sinner"  etc.  (Luke  7: 
37,  39)  ;  "  He  was  gone  to  be  a  guest  Avith  a  man  that  is  a  sinner  " 
(Luke  19:  7);  "Publican  and  sinners  " — often;  "How  can  a  man 
who  is  a  sinner  do  such  miracles  ?"  .  .  "We  know  that  this  man 
is  a  sinner."  (John  9:  16,  24). — This  usage,  being  both  common 
and  strong,  must  be  conceded  (it  would  seem)  to  have  weight  in 
the  interpretation  of  these  words  of  John. — According  to  this 
usage  he  wdio  practices  sin  is  a  positive  character — a  real  sinner, 
whose  spirit  and  life  fix  and  stamp  him  as  a  known  law-breaker, 
even  if  not  in  every  case  a  man  of  lawless  s^iirit. 

But  it  behooves  us  to  beware  lest  we  push  this  supposed  sense 
of  his  words  too  fax*,  and  so  let  a  bad  class  of  sins,  such  as  should 
distress  any  Christian  heart,  escajje  condemnation  as  not  included 
under  the  word  "  sin."  For,  beyond  all  doubt,  John  is  here  la- 
boring to  show  that  Jesus,  our  Exemplar,  had  no  sin  ;  that  he  came 
to  take  away  all  sin,  and  that  the  pure  life  of  the  Heavenly  One 
should  inspire  all  his  friends  Avith  aspirations  for  the  same  purity 
even  here. 

What  then  is  John's  doctrine,  here,  in  regard  to  those  imper- 
fections of  which  many  apj^arently  true  Christians  confess  them- 
selves guilty  ? 

With  a  deep  undisguised  sense  of  the  great  delicacy  and  real 
difficulty  involved   in  this  question,  I  yet  venture   the   following 

"•■■The  best  textual  authorities  omit  the  word  "our,"  making  the 
affirmation  general. 


1.  JOHN.— CHAP.  III.  339 

suggestions: (L)  There  is  nothing  here  Vi'hich  indicates  thnt 

John  had  these  consciously  imperfect  yet  upward  struggling 
Christians  definitely  in  his  luind,  and  meant  his  statements  to 
bear  specially  upon  them. (2.)  Consequently  the  utmost  cau- 
tion should  be  used  in  applying  these  words  to  cases  Avhich  seem 
to  have  been  foreign  from  his  thought. (3.)  Yet  all  his  state- 
ments and  reasonings  bear  against  every  form  and  degree  of  sin 
of  which  men  can  be  intelligently  conscious,  and  toward  the  attain- 
ment here  in  time  of  Christ-like  purity. 

On  this  passage  Luecke  remarks — "  John  speaks  not  of  the  dif- 
ferent degrees  of  perfection  which  struggling  Christians  have 
reached,  but  of  the  ideal  and  absolute  difference  between  Chris- 
tian virtue  and  piety,  and  sin  in  general." Ncander  (Epistle 

of  John,  p.  194)  speaking  of  the  really  Christian  spirit  and  of  its 
possible  imperfections,  remarks :  "  That  the  determining  tenden- 
cies of  the  Christian,  of  the  will  in  the  Christian,  can  be  no 
other  than  holy  and  averse  to  sin  :  that  only  the  after  workings 
of  the  former  relations  of  sin,  of  the  old  man,  oppose  themselves 
to  what  is  now  his  determining  and  controlling  tendency." 

7.  Little  children,  let  no  man  deceive  you :  lie  that  doeth 
righteousness  is  righteous,  even  as  he  is  righteous. 

8.  He  that  committeth  sin  is  of  the  devil ;  for  the  devil 
sinneth  from  the  beginning.  For  this  purpose  the  Son  of 
God  was  manifested,  that  he  might  destroy  the  Avorks  of  the 
devil. 

Manifestly  John  was  not  beating  the  air,  but  levelling  his  blows 
against  teachers  of  false  doctrine,  then  abroad,  infesting  the 
churches.  Under  what  pretenses  they  sought  to  defend  iniquity, 
and  perhaps  immorality,  it  is  not  of  special  importance  that  we 
should  know.  No  doubt  John  met  them,  squarely  confronting 
their  doctrine  when  he  said — None  save  the  doer  of  righteousness 
is  a  righteous  man,  like  Jesus  Christ.  Profession  of  righteous- 
ness without  the  real  practice  of  it  is  worse  than  worthless.  Sin 
is  of  the  devil,  and  he  who  commits  it  works  under  his  master  and 
in  his  service.  The  Son  of  God  became  manifest  among  men  to 
war  upon  the  devil,  to  counteract  and  destroy  his  works.  No  an- 
tagonists were  ever  more  squarely  confronted  than  they  or  in  more 
deadly  hostility  to  each  other. 

9.  Whosoever  is  born  of  God  doth  not  commit  sin ;  for 
his  seed  remaineth  in  him:  and  he  cannot  sin,  because  he  is 
born  of  God. 

Beyond  question,  being  "born  of  God"  here  is  the  new  birth, 
regeneration ;  and  the  figure  of  the  human  birth  is  still  carried 
out  in  the  allusion  to  "  his  seed"  as  remaining  in  him.  As  we 
might  say,  one  born  of  royal  parentage  carries  ever  in  his  veins 

his  royal  blood. Bat  when  we  pass  from  the  material  to  the 

spiritual  and  ask — ^^What  is  that  in  the  humiin  soul  which,  being 


340  I.  JOHN.— ciiAr.  III. 

introduced  in  regeneration,  remains  in  liim,  by  virtue  of  which 
he  can  not  sin,  what  shall  we  say  ?  Does  Peter  express  it  accu- 
rately (1  Peter  1:  23) — "Being  born  again,  not  of  corruptible 
seed,  but  of  incorruptible,  hy  the  ivord  of  God  which  liveth  and 
abideth  forever"?  This  turns  our  mind  to  God's  revealed  truth 
as  the  corresponding  spiritual  reality.  Yet  does  not  the  nature 
of  the  case  suggest  also  a  certain  receptivity  to  this  truth  and  a 
certain  moral  attitude  of  will  and  purpose,  due  influentially  to  the 
Spirit  of  God,  which  give  cast  and  tone  to  all  subsequent  moral 
activities  ?  Metaphysically  considered,  the  philosophy  of  the  new 
birth  is  deep.  It  is  more  easy,  perhaps  more  common,  to  talk 
about  it  superficially  than  profoundly.  As  interpreters  we  may 
reasonably  be  satisfied  with  saying  that  according  to  John's  phi- 
losophy of  mind  the  new  birth  brought  into  the  soul  an  element 
at  once  morally  powerful  and  permanent,  which  quite  forbids  any 
relapse  into  utter,  fatal  antagonism  to  God.  In  the  strong  em- 
phatic sense  of  sinning,  the  new-born  soul  can  not  sin. 

10.  In  this  the  children  of  God  are  manifest,  and  the 
children  of  the  devil :  whosoever  doeth  not  righteousness  is 
not  of  God,  neither  he  that  loveth  not  his  brother. 

In  the  sense  common  in  the  gospel  of  John  (e.  g.  8 :  37-44), 
according  to  which  Jesus  admitted  that  the  Jews  were  Abraham's 
progeny  but  denied  that  they  were  his  children,  the  being  chil- 
dren here  implies  that  they  have  the  spirit  of  their  father.  In 
this  sense  the  children  of  God  and  the  children  of  the  devil  may 
be  readily  tested  and  proved:  The  former  practice  righteousness; 
the  latter  wickedness :  the  former  loveth  his  brother;  the  latter 
hateth. 

11.  For  this  is  the  message  that  ye  heard  from  the  be- 
ginning, that  "\ve  should  love  one  another. 

12.  Not  as  Cain,  icho  was  of  that  wicked  one,  and  slew 
his  brother.  And  wherefore  slew  he  him?  Because  his 
own  Avorks  Avere  evil,  and  his  brother's  righteous. 

From  the  beginning  of  the  gospel  age — perhaps  John  would 
say — in  my  gospel  history — ye  had  the  message  which  commanded 
that  we  "  love  one  another"  (John  13  :  34,  35).  An  example  in 
point — put  in  contrast — will  make  it  plain  and  give  it  force : 
"  Not  as  Cain  who  Avas  of  Satan  "  (impelled  by  his  instigations) 
"  and  slew  his  brother."  But  note  wath  Avhat  masterly  ease  and 
accuracy  John  puts  his  finger  on  the  impelling  motive.  Cain 
could  not  bear  to  see  his  virtuous  brother  accepted  of  God,  and 
himself,  consciously  guilty,  rejected.  "His  own  works  were  evil 
and  his  brother's  righteous,"  and  worst  of  all,  God  knew  it  and 
saw  fit  to  testify  his  views  of  them  both.  It  was  too  much  for 
the  wicked  brother  to  bear.     So  envy  and  jealousy  Avork   unto 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  III.  341 

murder.— — But  is  every  body's  envy  and  hate  of  a  brother  of  the 
same  sort  and  of  like  guilt  with  that  of  Cain?     So  John  implies. 

13.  jNIarvcl  not,  my  bretlu-en,  if  the  •world  hate  you. 

14.  We  know  that  we  have  passed  from  death  unto  life, 
Ijecause  we  love  the  brethren.  He  that  loveth  not  Jiis 
brother  abideth  in  deatli. 

15.  Whosoever  hatetli  his  brother  is  a  murderer:  and  yc 
know  that  no  murderer  hath  eternal  life  abiding  in  him. 

That  the  world  should  hate  you  should  surprise  no  one.  The 
case  of  Cain  explains  it  all.  "When  we  truly  love  the  brethren  witli 
love  like  Christ's,  we  may  safely  infer  from  it  that  we  have  passed 
from  death  in  sin  unto  life  in  Ciod.  A  loving  heart  toward  Chris- 
tian brethren  is  one  of   the  surest  tests   of  piety  and  one  most 

easily  applied. On  the  opposite  hand,  to  hate  one's  brother  is 

the  spirit  of  murder  as  ye  saw  in  Cain;  and  hoAV  can  a  murderer 

have  eternal  life  abiding  in  him? Xote  the  pith  and  force  of 

the  phrase  "  eternal  life"  to  signify  true  godliness — such  a  char- 
acter as  ripens  for  immortal  blessedness  and  is  indeed  a  heaven 
ah-eady  begun  in  the  soul.  The  pungency  and  force  of  the 
phrase  lie  in  the  obvious  incompatibility  of  murder  and  love 
dwelling  in  the  same  bosom. 

If  we  take  love  to  the  brethren  as  an  infallible  test  of  piety, 
it  becomes  vitally  important  that  we  make  no  mistake  as  to  its 
genuineness.  On  this  point  there  may  be  fatal  mistakes.  For 
example ;  there  is  a  social  good  feeling  that  falls  far  short  of 
Christian  love  of  the  brethren :  there  may  be  a  common  sym- 
pathy in  church  work  and  religious  service  which  has  little  to 
do  with  love  to  Christ  or  to  the  souls  of  men.  Even  worship  may 
be  congenial  for  its  esthetic  taste  and  surroundings  rather  than 

for  its  adaptations  to   the   broken  and   contrite  spirit. Then 

moreover,  what  is  thought  to  be  brotherly  love  may  go  not  beyond 
complacency  in  really  lovable  social  qualities,  and  may  have  in  it 
none  of  that  outgoing  benevolence  which  loves  and  seeks  the 
highest  spiritual  good  of  the  brethren  and  gives  itself  spontane- 
ously to  prayer  and  labor  in  their  behalf.  Only  that  love  of 
brethren  is  genuine,  .and,  as  a  test  of  piety  reliable,  which  presvp- 
p>oses  love  to  God — as  John  expresses  it;  loving  him  that  begat, 
we  love  his  begotten ;  loving  God,  we  love  his  children,  for  they 
become  (we  may  say)  lineal  brothers — brethren  not  in  name  but 
in  blood — in  spirit;  in  character. 

1 6.  Hereby  perceive  we  the  love  of  God,  because  he  laid 
down  his  life  for  us :  and  we  ought  to  lay  down  our  lives  for 
the  brethren. 

The  reader  will  notice  the  words  "  of  God  "  in  Italics,  indi- 
cating that  the  Greek  has  no  words  corresponding.  These  Italic 
words  are  not  at  all  necessary  to  the  sense.     They  rather  mislead 


342  I.  JOHN.— CHAr.  in. 

than  lead  well,  for  the  thought  is  rather  upon  Christ  than  God. 
Herein  have  we  known  [_i.  e.  have  had  the  means  of  fully  appre- 
ciating] what  real  love  means ;  viz.  by  this — That  he  [Jesus 
ChristJ  laid  down  his  life  for  us.  This  is  the  crowning  illustra- 
tion of  real  love.  We  need  go  no  further  for  one  more  expres- 
sive.  Note  the  striking  contrast  which  suggested  this  allusion 

to  the  death  of  Christ — viz.  between  the  murderer  who  takes  an- 
other's life  because  he  hates,  and  Jesus  who  lays  down  his  own 
because  he  loves. From  this  example  of  Jesus  the  writer  ad- 
vances to  the  Christian  duty.  We  ought  to  be  ready  to  follow 
Christ,  even  to  the  laying  down  of  our  lives  for  the  brethren. 
Why  not?     This  could  not  be  more  than  Jesus  has  done  for  us. 

17.  But  whoso  liatli  this  world's  good,  aud  seetli  liis  brother 
have  need,  and  shutteth  up  his  bowels  of  comiyassioii  from 
him,  how  dwelleth  the  love  of  God  in  him  ? 

18.  My  little  children,  let  us  not  love  in  word,  neither  in 
tongue ;  but  in  deed  and  in  truth. 

The  service  of  love  is  often  withheld  at  a  point  far  short  of 
laying  down  our  life  for  the  brethren.  Consider  this  case  in 
point: — A  man  has  this  Avorld's  good — literally,  the  life  of  this 
world,  in  the  sense  of  the  means  of  supporting  life ;  and  sees  his 
brother  in  want  and  shuts  up  his  bowels  of  compassion — hardens 
his  heart  against  sympathy  and  shuts  his  hand  from  help; — 
How  can  the  love  of  God  be  in  him  ?  Can  it  be  possible  that  he 
loves  God  and  yet  manifests  no  love  for  God's  children  ?  His  love 
can  not  reach  God  in  the  way  of  beneficence  ;  such  love  is  cheap 
in  the  sense  that  it  costs  him  no  outlay  of  labor  or  sacrifice.  If 
he  had  any  real  love  for  God's  children,  he  might  readily  show 
it — but  he  shows  it  not!     Let  him  not  deceive  himself  with  the 

delusion  that  he  loves  God! Mark  how  pun;sently John  puts 

his  admonition — Let  us  not  love  in  Avord  neither  in  tongue  ;  Avord- 
love,  tongue-love,  is  odious,  disgusting,  hateful  to  God  as  it  is 
worthless  and  abusive  to  the  suffering  poor.  Let  your  love  be 
that  of  deeds  and  realities,  a  love  that  evinces  its  sincerity  by  its 
legitimate  fruits  of  beneficence. 

This  opens  the  great  subject  of  charity  to  the  poor  ;  not  indeed 
presenting  all  its  nice  questions  as  to  helping  the  indolent,  the 
improA'ident,  the  wasteful,  the  dishonest,  the  -vicious;  but  putting 
the  subject  forward  in  its  simple  elements — compassion  for  the 
needy.  It  was  not  in  place  for  John  to  raise  questions  as  to  the 
Avisdom  of  one  method  of  relief  compared  Avith  another,  nor  to 
show  how  to  forestall  abuses  of  charity.  He  must  be  expected 
to  speak  for  his  OAvn  times.  Then,  some  Christians  lost  all  by 
confiscation;  some  were  imprisoned;  some  banished;  some  slain — 
for  their  fidelity  to  Christ.  Shall  pinching  Avant  occasioned  by 
such  fidelity  to  Christ  be  unrelieved  by  their  well-fed  brethren  ? 
The  principle  of  loving  one's  Christian  brother  at  the  cost  of 
some  sacrifice  of  worldly  good  to  meet  their  greater  need,  John 


T.  JOHN.— CHAP.  III.  343 

sought  to  present  in  strong  light,  and  has  done  it.  Let  us  be- 
ware lest  we  dishonor  this^  principle,  disown  this  duty,  and  fail 
of  the  blessings  of  obedience  because  in  our  times  Christian 
charity  is  sometimes  selfishly  abused,  and  numberless  questions 
as  to  the  wisest  method  are  sprung  upon  us.  It  were  better  to 
fall  below  perfect  wisdom  than  to  mar  the  beauty  and  miss  the 
blessedness  of  real  love. 

19.  And  hereby  we  know  that  we  are  of  the  truth,  and 
shall  assure  our  hearts  before  him. 

20.  For  if  our  heart  condemn  us,  God  is  greater  than  our 
heart,  and  knoweth  all  things. 

21.  Beloved,  if  our  heart  condemn  us  not,  then  have  we 
confidence  toward  God. 

By  such  tests  as  this,  proving  our  love  by  really  doing  good, 
making  sacrifices  for  our  more  needy  brethren,  we  may  know  that 
Ave  are  of  the  truth,  and  are  entitled  to  have  confidence  of  soul 
before  him.  "Assure  our  hearts  before  him"  in  the  sense  of  al- 
laying conscientious  fears  and  taking  encouragement  from  a  con- 
sciousness of  real  honesty  before  God. "Being  of  the  truth" 

looks  toward  "loving  in  deed  and  in  truth."  To  have  this  proof 
that  our  love  is  genuine  will  justify  a  quiet  non-accusing  con- 
science. The  word  "  hoai-t"  is  applied  here  to  Avhat  is  commonly 
known  as  the  conscience — the  moral  sense,  considei'ed  as  taking 
cognizance  of  our  own  moral  states  and  acts.  God  has  given  us 
this  cajiacity  of  self-inspection  and  self-judgment.  John  mani- 
festly assumes  that  in  general  its  decisions  are  to  be  obeyed  as  in 
harmony  with  God's,  and  that  we  may  expect  God  to  sustain  and 
endorse  them.  If  our  OAvn  conscience  condemns  us — e.  g.  as  to 
the  point  here  in  hand — for  withholding  our  sympathy  and  aid 
from  our  more  needy  and  sjjfiPering  brother,  we  may  be  very  sure 
that  God — greater  than  our  heart  and  knowing  all  things  more 
perfectly  than  we  can — will  condemn  us  also.  But  if  our  con- 
science condemn  us  not,  we  may  at  least  have  confidence  toward 
God  that  he  does  not  condemn  us.  John  does  not  say — It  is  there- 
fore certain  that  God  will  not  condemn  us,  but  only,  that  we  may 
have  a  quiet  trust,  free  from  painful  solicitude. 

22.  And  whatsoever  Ave  ask,  we  receive  of  him,  because 
Ave  keep  his  commandments,  and  do  "those  things  that  are 
pleasing  in  his  sight. 

This  calm,  non-accusing,  I'eally  approving  conscience,  sustains 
most  vital  relations  to  prayer.  We  do  not  come  before  God  al- 
ready self-condemned  for  our  dishonesty,  insincerity,  hypocrisy: 
no,  but  rather  Avith  confidence  that  we  honestly  aim  to  keep  his 
commandments  and  do  evermore  what  Ave  suppose  and  belieA^e  to 
be  pleasing  in  his  sight.     John  says  that,  coming  before  God  in 

this  moral  attitude,  we  receiA^e  of  him  Avhatever  we  ask. Let 

it  be  carefully  observed  here  that  John  does  not  rest  our  preva- 


344  I.  JOHN.— CHAP.   IV. 

lence  in  prayer  upon  the  basis  of  our  personal  merit;  does  not 
say  that  having  deserved  blessings,  Ave  may  be  sure  of  receiving; 
but  merely  says  that  a  consciousness  of  honesty  toward  God  and 
of  a  steadfast  aim  to  do  his  commandments  legitimately  begets 
confidence  before  him,  and  that  God  will  respond  with  favoring 
answer  to  our  prayer — of  course  only  for  Christ's  sake.  Well 
does  Neander  remark  on  this  passage — "As  sons,  whose  filial  re- 
lation has  suffered  no  interruption,  can  with  child-like  trust  and 
confidence  ask  all  from  their  father ;  so  believers  Avhose  life  is  of 
the  truth,  who  are  conscious  of  no  disturbance  of  their  filial  re- 
lation to  God  through  unfaithfulness  on  their  part,  can  ask  all  with 
child-like  confidence  from  God  their  Father." 

23.  And  this  is  his  commandment,  That  Ave  should  be- 
lieve on  the  name  of  his  Son  Jesus  Christ,  and  love  one 
another,  as  he  gave  us  commandment. 

24.  And  he  that  keepeth  his  commandments  dwelleth  in 
him,  and  he  in  him.  And  hereby  we  know  that  he  abideth 
in  us,  by  the  Spirit  Avhich  he  hath  given  us. 

Altogether  like  John  are  these  comprehensive  words  expressing 
the  elementary  principles  of  gospel  requirement.  If  you  ask 
what  are  the  central  commandments  in  the  gospel  scheme,  he 
ansAvers — Believe  in  Jesus ;  love  one  another.  Keeping  his  com- 
mandments ye  come  into  most  intimate  mutual  relations  to  him ; 
ye  dwell  in  him ;  he  dAvells  in  you ;  and  of  this  indAvelling  his 
Spirit,  present  to  your  sonl,  is  the  witness.  We  may  knoAV  that 
Christ  dAvells  in  us   by  the  self-conscious  testimony  which  his 

Spirit  bears  to  our  inmost  heart. This  witnessing  of  the  Spirit, 

taught  plainly  here  by  John  (see  4:  13),  and  also  by  Paul  (e.  g. 
Kom.  8 :  16),  is  doubtless  liable  to  abuse  (Avhat  point  of  gospel 
truth  or  grace  is  not  ?),  yet  is  none  the  less  a  thing  of  fact  and 
of  conscious  experience.  If  the  mission  of  the  Spirit  be  a  reality, 
and  his  presence  in  Christian  souls,  a  fact,  Avhy  should  it  be 
thought  a  thing  incredible  that  he  should  make  his  presence  mani- 
fest in  the  temple  where  he  dwells  ?  Why  should  not  his  voice 
be  heard — nay  more,  be  sometimes  identified — made  so  definite, 
so  clear,  so  emphatic,  so  precious,  that  the  human  soul  may  hear 
and  may  verily  knoAV  that  this  is  his  OAvn  voice  and  none  other 
than  his? 


d;^o 


CHAPTER    IV. 

To  expose  false  spirits;  to  proA^e  their   false  character  by  de- 
cisive tests;  to  give  tests  of  real  piety  for  each  one's  OAvn  self- 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  IV.  345 

judjTment;  to  give  prominence  to  love  as  the  cardinal  element  of 
Christian  character — these  are  the  leading  themes  in  this  chapter. 

1.  Beloved,  believe  not  every  spirit,  but  try  the  spirits 
whether  they  are  of  God :  because  many  false  pro2')hets  arc 
gone  out  into  the  world. 

2.  Hereby  know  ye  the  Spirit  of  God :  Every  spirit  that 
confesseth  that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh  is  of  God : 

3.  And  every  spirit  that  confesseth  not  that  Jesus  Christ 
is  come  in  the  flesh  is  not  of  God  :  and  this  is  that  spirit  of 
antichrist,  whereof  ye  have  heard  that  it  should  come;  and 
even  now  already  is  it  in  the  world. 

Other  spirits  than  those  from  God  have  infested  the  church 
more  or  less  in  all  ages.  The  law  of  Moses  contemplated  their 
presence  and  provided  tests  for  their  detection  (Deut.  13  :  1-5) — 
these  tests  being  not  the  miracles  they  claimed  to  work  but  the 
doctrines  they  taught.  In  the  age  of  Jeremiah,  they  were  a  ter- 
rible curse  upon  Israel.  Jesus  forewarned  his  disciples  against 
them  (Matt.  24:  11,24) — not  without  reason,  as  their  own  subse- 
quent writings  show.  It  was  therefore  the  dictate  of  wisdom  to 
enjoin — "Believe. not  every  spirit,  but  try  the  spirits  whether 
they  ai-e  of  God."  Not  all  who  profess  to  be  led  by  the  Spirit  of 
God  are  to  be  accepted.  Try  them  by  what  they  teach ;  receive 
them  not  till  ye  know  that  their  message  is  in  accordance  Avith 

God's  revealed  truth. At  the  time  and  place  where  John  lived 

and  wrote,  the  touch-stone  was  the  question  whether  "Jesus  Christ 
had  come  in  the  flesh" — the  denial  of  his  true  humanity,  involv- 
ing of  course  the  denial  of  the  incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God. 

It  deserves  more  careful  attention  than  is  sometimes  given  to  it 
that  these  words  of  John — "Believe  not  every  spirit,  but  try  the 
spirits  whether  they  are  of  God  " — imply  that  these  "  spirits  " 
claimed  to  come  with  inspiration  from  God.  "We  must  suppose 
that  they  imitated  the  true  prophets  of  that  age ;  put  on  the  airs 
of  ecstasy,  rapture,  strong  mental  excitement,  so  that  the  utmost 
vigilance  and  the  application  of  searching  tests  became  a  necessity 
for  the  protection  of  the  churches.  Furthermore,  coupling  these 
representations  of  John  with  the  teachings  of  Paul  it  becomes 
clear  that  in  the  view  of  the  apostles,  these  false  prophets  were 
really  instigated  by  the  devil.  Their  inspiration  came  from  him. 
Paul  said — "  We  wrestle  not  against  flesh  and  blood  [only]  but 
against  principalities,  against  powers,  against  the  rulers  of  the 
darkness  of  this  world,  against  wicked  spirits  in  high  places 
(Eph.  6:  12).  So  the  apostles  held  and  taught.  Were'they  mis- 
taken ?  Was  this  notion  a  mere  superstition  of  the  age  ?  Has 
the  progress  of  human  thought  lifted  this  notion  as  an  incubus 
of  superstition  from  the  heart  of  the  intelligent,  scientific  world 
of  our  days?     Or  is  it  not  rather  the  case  that  the  last  of  Satan's 


346  I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  IV. 

devices  is  to  beguile  men  into  ignoring  his  agencies,  not  to  pay 
also  his  very  existence  ? 

4.  Ye  are  of  God,  little  children,  and  have  overcome  tliem  : 
because  greater  is  he  that  is  in  you,  than  lie  that  is  in  the 
world. 

5.  They  are  of  the  Avorld :  therefore  speak  they  of  the 
■world,  and  the  world  heareth  them. 

6.  We  are  of  God  :  he  that  knoweth  God  heareth  us  ;  he 
that  is. not  of  God  heareth  not  us.  Hereby  know  we  the 
spirit  of  truth,  and  the  spirit  of  error. 

"  Have  overcome  them  " — the  "  false  prophets  and  lying  spirits." 
Notice,  John  says — "  Have  overcome,'  although  the  battle  was 
yet  mostly  to  be"  fought  still.  Their  victory  could  be  anticipated 
with  the  utmost  certainty ;  for  to  have  God  on  our  side  is  always 
certain  victory.  The  opposing  parties  have  tried  their  relative 
strength  on  many  a  field  of  struggle — God  always  the  conqueror. 
To  have  "  God  on  our  side  " — we  are  wont  to  say ;  but  John  puts 
this  fact  more  forcibly — "  God  in  you ;  "  "  Greater  is  He  that  is 
ill  you  than  he  that  is"  in  the  world."     When  God  is  in  us,  he  can 

not  suffer  us  to  be  overcome. ]\[atching  God  against  Satan,  God 

is  evermore  the  greater  and  the  mightier,  so  that  even  "  little 
children,"  Christians  in  the  infancy  of  the  religious  life,  are  al- 
i-eady  more  than  conquerors  Avhen  they  fully  admit  the  mighty  God 
into  their  trusting  souls.  "  They  that  wait  on  the  Lord  shall  re- 
new their  strength." Those  false  prophets  "  are  of  the  world;  " 

are  not  sent  of  God,  but  come  forth  from  the  world,  possessed  by 
the  spiril^of  the  world,  in  sympathy  with  the  world  only  and  al- 
together. Hence  their  speech  and  doctrine  are  of  the  world. 
No  marvel  then  if  men  of  the  world  hear  them.  Of  course  they 
will.  "  But  we  are  of  God,"  in  the  same  sense  in  which  they 
are  "  of  the  world."  Therefore  the  men  w'ho  know  God  will  hear 
us ;  men  not  of  God  will  not  hear  us.  This  test  will  enable  you 
to  discriminate  the  spirit  of  truth  from  the  spirit  of  error.  Godly 
men  are  in  sympathy  with  the  former;  ungodly  men  with  the 
latter.  Men  of  God  hear  and  love  the  truth ;  godless  men  receive 
and  love  falsehood — the  errors  and  lies  that  claim  to  be  Christian 
doctrine. 

7.  Beloved,  let  us  love  one  another :  for  love  is  of  God  ; 
and  every  one  that  loveth  is  born  of  God,  and  knoweth  God. 

8.  He  that  loveth  not,  knoweth  not  God;  for  God  is 
love. 

9.  In  this  was  manifested  the  love  of  God  toward  us,  be- 
cause that  God  sent  his  only  begotten  Son  into  the  world, 
that  we  might  live  through  him. 

10.  Herein  is  love,  not  that  Ave  loved  God,  but  that  he 
loved  u.'!,  and  sent  his  Son  to  he  the  propitiation  for  our  sins. 


J 


I.  JOHN.— ciiAr.  IV.  347 

A2;ainand  again  tho  author  enjoins — Let  us  love  one  another — ■ 
as  if  in  his  regard  this  was  the  most  sacred  of  Christian  obliga- 
tions, the  first  of  Christian  duties.  Was  it  because  in  his  time 
this  duty  was  grievously  violated ;  or  because  his  own  fatherly, 
loving  heart  was  full  of  this  spirit  to  constant  overflowing  ;  or  was 
it  due  to  his  intelligent  conviction  of  the  relative  place  of  this 
in  the  glorious  group  of  Christian  graces  ?  Probably,  if  we  saw 
the  Avhole  heart  of  this  patriarch  we  should  find  that  not  some  one 
alone  but  all  these  causes  combined  lent  their  force  to  impress 
his  deep  sense  of  the  worth  of  brotherly  love  in  the  household  of 
faith. 

Let  us  observe  the  logic  of  the  precept;  "Let  us  love  one 
another,_/br  love  is  of  God  ;  "  the  inbreathing  of  his  Spirit  brings 
it  down  from  his  own  infinite  fullness  of  love.  When  God  gives 
us  of  his  Spirit,  what  can  it  be  less  or  other  than  love  ?  The  lov- 
ing human  heart  has  been  born  of  God,  for  such  love  comes  not 
of  man  ;  is  not  born  of  the  flesh ;  is  in  no  sense  congenial  to 
man's  selfish  nature.  Therefore  the  presence  of  such  pure  love 
to  one  another  testifies  to  the  new  birth  from  God  and  to  a  spirit- 
ual knowledge  and  apprehension  of  him. Hence  the  converse 

of  this  should  also  be  true;  he  that  loveth  not  his  brethren  can 
not  possibly  know  God — in  the  sense  of  an  experimental  appre- 
hension of  his  character  and  a  true  sympathy  with  his  nature — 
for  God  is  love.  Therefore  to  knoAV  God  as  ho  is  means  that  Ave 
know  his  love  and  experience  the  inbreatliings  of  that  love  through 
our  own  moral  nature. 

"  For  God  is  love."  The  same  truth  is  reaflirmed  (v.  16).  Let 
us  give  it  our  thoughtful  attention. 

In  form,  the  statement  seems  abstract,  metaphysical ;  for  ob- 
serve, it  is  not  that  God  is  kind,  aSectionate,  evermore  manifest- 
ing his  good  will;  but  that  he  is  love  itself — the  very  impersona- 
tion of  love;  all  love,  and  nothing  else  but  love.  It  is  of  course 
comprehensive,  all-embracing.  It  means  that  there  can  never 
be  any  thing  in  him,  nothing  coming  forth  from  him,  that  is 
not  loving — an  outgoing  of  his  love. 

But  some  one  will  say — Does  this  statement  really  include 
and  cover  everj  element  of  his  being?  Is  it  not  of  his  nature 
that  he  should  fill  the  universe  with  his  presence  so  that  there 
shall  be  never  a  point  of  space,  in  heaven,  earth,  or  hell,  where 
God  is  not?     How  can  this  quality  of  his  nature  be  conceived 

of   as  falling   under  this  definition — God  is  love  ? So  of  his 

poiver,  'which,  since  he  is  God,  must  be  simply  infinite — equal 
to  any  results  which  power  can  produce.  But  how  can  this  in- 
finite poAver  be  brought  within  the  definition — "God  is  love"  ? 

We  must  answer  these  and  analogous  questions  by  admitting 
the  broad  distinction  between  God's  natural  attributes  and  his 
moral.  The  natural  are  so  irrelevant  to  John's  line  of  thought 
that  he  seems  not  to  notice  them  at  all.  Really,  as  compared 
Avith  the  moral,  they  have  only  a  slight  importance.  Yet  per- 
haps it  is  more  to  our  purpose  to  say  that  John  might  reason- 


34$  r.  JOHN.— CHAP.  IV, 

ably  leave  out  of  account  the  whole  group  of  God's  natural  at- 
tributes because  they  can  never  very  greatly  need  either  proof 
or  illustration.  They  are  self-affirmed  so  vigorously  in  every 
man's  sober  reason ;  they  become  such  a  necessity  to  our  idea 
of  God,  that  they  prove  themselves.  The  man  who  can  not  in- 
tuitively see  and  know  that  God  must  be  every-whcre  present, 
and  infinite  in  power  and  all-searching  in  knowledge,  has  not 
yet  begun  to  think  to  purpose — has  too  little  mind  to  be  prof- 
ited by  any  logic  of  reasoning  or  force  of   facts. Not  so  in 

the  great  realm  of  God's  moral  nature.  Ilei'e  it  is  not  so  clear 
to  every  man's  strong  intuitions  that  "God  is  love."  For  do  Ave 
not  see  suflFering,  calamity,  among  his  creatures?  Do  not  hu- 
man nerves,  made  by  his  own  hand,  sometimes  quiver  with  pain 
and  seem  to  be  nothing  else  but  inlets  of  agony  ?  Do  not  these 
sufferings  sometimes  fall  upon  guileless  infancy  and  upon  sin- 
less animals,  and  fixU,  it  may  be,  with  no  apparent  graduation 
to  human  guilt  ?  To  allude  to  these  seeming  irregularities,  not 
to  say  mysteries,  under  God's  government  may  suffice  to  show 
that  this  definition  of  God  is  by  no  means  gratuitous  and  un- 
called for.  If  it  be  certainly  true,  and  if  in  very  deed  all  the 
apparent  irregularities,  mysteries,  and  seeming  contradictions  to 
it  which  appear  in  the  history  of  our  world  are  reducible  within 
this  definition  ;  if  the  entire  sufferings  in  the  universe  be  not 
inconsistent  with  God's  perfect  love,  but  come  legitimately  un- 
der it — permitted  in  wisdom  and  limited  to  what  they  are  by 
love — how  sublime  must  be  the  revelation  that  shall  prove  it  I 
How  glorious  the  outshining  of  truth  that  shall  disclose  the  love 
that  lay  behind  every  apparently  dark  dispensation — underneath 
every  mysterious  law  of  human  existence  ! 

But  some  one's  troubled  heart  will  ask — Can  it  be  possible  that 
John  meant  all  this  Avhen  he  said,  "God  is  love"?  Are  we  not 
overstraining  his  words  when  we  give  them  so  broad  a  sweep  of 
application  ? 

Let  us  see.  The  subject  is  too  grave  to  be  passed  upon  with- 
out attentive  and  candid  consideration. 

How  does  John  know  that  God  is  love  ?  What  made  him  think 
so? 

Some  devout  minds  will  expect  mo  to  answer  this  question  by 
foiling  back  upon  his  inspiration  and  saj'ing — He  wrote  so  un- 
der the  dictation  of  the  inditing  Spirit. This  is  doubtless  one 

way  to  answer  the  question,  but  not  the  only  way.  This  epistle 
of  his  (it  so  happens)  does  not  leave  us  there,  but  suggests  very 
distinctly  that  John  did  not  so  much  take  this  statement  upon 
trust  as  see  the  truth  of  it  in  the  grea.t  revelation  which  God  had 
made  of  his  love.  The  next  verse  gives  us  the  light  Ave  need. 
We  shall  see  there  how  the  great  love  of  God  had  been  mani- 
fested before  his  eyes.  He  tells  us  hoAV  his  mind  became  estab- 
lished upon  this  everlasting  rock  of  truth  as  to  the  loving  heart 
of  God.  One  great  fact  was  proof  enough: — "Because  God  sent 
his  only  begotten  Son  into  the  Avorld  that  Ave  might  live  through 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  IV.  349 

hini."  This  means  real  love.  If  you  ask  for  some  demonstration 
of  God's  love,  here  it  is.  I  do  not  mean,  he  M'ould  say,  love  in 
our  heart  toward  God,  but  love  in  God's  heart  toward  us.  It  was 
this  love  that  made  him  "send  his  Son  to  he  the  propitiation  for 

our  sins." Do  we   take   in   the   full  significance  of  this  great 

gift  and  sacrifice  from  God,  considered  as  a  demonstration  of  his 

love? Reflect; — "Propitiation  for  our  sins" — "that  we  might 

live  through  him."  Consider;  sin  is  rebellion  against  God,  with 
its  root  in  causeless  hatred,  enmity.  It  is  not  only  guilt,  but 
meanness.  Such  sin  makes  the  sinning  character  odious,  dis- 
gusting. It  seems  to  take  out  of  man  almost  every  quality  that 
God  could  regard  as  noble  or  attractive.  And  j'ct  God  so  loved 
this  debased,  hateful,  guilty  Avorld  of  sinners  that  he  sent  his  only 
begotten  Son  to  die  a  sacrifice  for  them  that  they  might  live  ! 
Was  not  this  love,  all  love,  one  vast  outpouring  of  love,  one 
sublime  and  resistless  demonstration  of  an  infinite  heart  of  love  ? 
How  can  it  be  conceived  possible  that  God  should  give  up  his 
only  Son  to  such  a  doom  if  his  heart  Avere  not  j^ure  and  perfect 
love? 

Thus  the  Apostle  John  reached  the  conclusion — or  shall  we 
rather  say — felt  the  conviction— that  God  is  love.  It  forced  itself 
upon  his  soul.  'Hq  felt  the  proof  of  it  as  it  came  upon  him  with 
overwhelming  richness  and  fullness.  Herein  is  love.  Do  ye  ask. 
What  does  love  mean,  and  where  can  perfect  love  be  found  ? 
Here  it  is  !  Who  shall  ever  doubt  that  God  is  perfect  love  after 
such  a  demonstration  ? 

11.  Beloved,  if  God  so  loved  us,  we  ought  also  to  love 
oae  another. 

"If  God  so  loved  us" — if  God,  so  pure,  could  love  us,  so  vile; 
if  God  to  whom  sin  is  so  revolting  and  sinners  are  so  unlovable, 
and  whose  love,  to  reach  us,  must  condescend  so  low  and  bear  so 
much  abuse; — oh,  if  under  such  circumstances,  God  can  so  love 
us,  "toe  ought  to  love  one  another."  What  infinite  force  lies  in 
this  logic !  The  heart,  broken  for  sin,  sensible  of  the  great  com- 
passion of  God  toward  one  so  vile,  will  surely  feel  that  for  me  to 
love  my  brother,  each  being  alike  objects  of  God's  infinite  love,  is 
a  duty  to  be  done — a  claim  to  be  met — with  all  the  heart. 

12.  No  man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time.  If  we  love 
one  another,  God  dwelleth  in  us,  and  his  love  is  perfected 
in  us. 

13.  Hereby  know  we  that  we  dwell  in  him,  and  he  in  us, 
because  he  hath  given  us  of  his  Spirit. 

To  our  mortal  eyes  God  is  invisible;  not  a  man  has  ever  seen 
him :  but  what  has  this  to  do  with  the  Apostle's  thought  here  ? 
Pei'haps  this : — I  have  been  speaking  to  you  freely  of  God  and 
of  his  love  for  us,  as  if  we  could  really  know  much  of  him.     But 


350  I.  J  OILY.— CHAP.  IV. 

how  is  it  that  we  know  him? — —Usually  we  get  our  best  knowl- 
edge of  other  beings  by  seeing  them ;  but  none  of  us  have  in 
this  sense  seen  God ;  we  do  not  pretend  to  have  seen  him  with 
these  mortal  eyes.  But  if  Ave  love  one  another,  God  comes  nearer 
to  us  than  merely  being  present  to  our  eye  of  sense  ; — aye  indeed, 
if  Ave  loA^e  one  another,  God  diveUeth  in  tts.  lie  is  not  a  God 
simply  outside  of  us,  to  be  apprehended  by  the  sense  of  sight; 
but  He  lives  Avithin  us,  and  thus  his  love  reaches  its  full  and 
proper  development  in  our  souls.  We  knoAV  that  we  dwell  in 
him  and  he  in  us  by  means  of  the  witnessing  testimony  of  his 
Spirit.  This  Spirit  brings  a  sense  of  God's  presence,  and  Avith 
it,  fullness  of  joy,  and  so  inspires  a  SAveet  confidence  in  his  Ioa'c. 
The  Spirit  dwelling  in  our  hearts  is  the  presence  of  God  there. 
IS' 0  longer  is  God  far  away,  but  inexpressibly,  delightfully  near. 

14.  And  Ave  have  seen  and  do  testify  that  tlie  Father  sent 
the  Son  to  be  the  Savior  of  the  Avorkl. 

15.  Whosoever  shall  confess  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of 
God,  God  dAvelleth  in  him,  and  he  in  God. 

Under  such  revcLations  of  a  present  God,  inspiring  in  our 
hearts  pure  love  to  our  brethren,  impressing  us  with  a  perpetual 
sense  of  his  OAvn  perfect  love,  we  are  richly  prepared  to  see  and 
to  testify  that  the  Father  sent  the  Son  to  be  the  Savior  of  the 
world.  Nothing  less  could  bring  such  an  experience  of  loA'e  into 
our  inmost  heart.     In  such  exjserience  w^e  have  the  proof  of  this 

mission  of  Christ,  outgroAving  from  the  loA'e  of  the  Father. 

Conversely,  this  confessing  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God  certifies 
that  God  dwells  in  us  a.nd  that  we  dwell  in  him.  Of  course  John 
means  indefinitely  more  tlian  a  confession  Avith  the  lips  only. 
He  means  a  confession  that  aa'cIIs  up  from  the  depths  of  hu- 
man hearts — from  hearts  that  have  accepted  this  truth  in  love 
and  have  felt  its  transforming  spiritual  poAver. 

16.  And  we  ha^^e  knoAA^n  and  believed  the  love  that  God 
hath  to  us.  God  is  love ;  and  he  that  dwelleth  in  love 
dwelleth  in  God,  and  God  in  him. 

This  is  one  A^ital  point  in  our  experience ;  Ave  haA'e  knoAvn  and  be- 
lieved the  loA^e  that  God  bears  toAvard  us.     We  accept  it  as  true — 

indeed,  as  a  most  blessed  truth. On  the  words,  "God  is  love," 

see  Notes  on  a'.  8. The  Avords — "  lie  that  dAvelleth  in  loA'e" — 

should  be  construed  in  keej^ing  with  the  strain  of  this  chapter, 
and  indeed,  of  this  whole  epistle.  So  construed,  they  refer 
especially  to  love  of  the  brethren,  (considei'ed  as  having  its  root 
in  love  to  God) — the  deep  mutual  affection  which  reigns  in  the 
hearts  of  those  who  are  born  to  God  and  are  V^rought  under 
the  full  influence  of  the  love  God  hath  toward  all  his  children. 
Loving  the  Father  supremely,  we  shall  surely  loA'e  all  l^is  chil- 
dren. One  who  dAvells  in  the  atmosphere  of  such  love  to  the 
brethren  dwells  in  God  and  God  in  him. 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  IV.  351 

17.  Herein  is  our  love  made  perfect,  that  we  may  have 
boldness  in  the  day  of  judgment :  because  as  he  is,  so  are 
we  in  this  world. 

This  verse  is  somewhat  obscure,  Jind  has  been  interpreted  vari 

ously  by  good  critics. 1  understand  "  our  love  "  (Gr.  love  with 

us)  to  refer  particularly  to  mutual  Christian  love  of  the  brethren: 
the  "day  of  judgment  '  to  be  (as  usual  in  the  N.  T.)  the  final 
judgment  of  the  race:  "boldness"  I  take  in  the  sense  of  an  unre- 
strained, joyful  confidence,  as  toward  one  with  whom  we  are  on 
terms  of  intimacy  and  may  speak  freely.  In  the  phrase — "Be- 
cause as  ho  is" — "he"  must  refer  specially  to  Christ  and  the 
clause,  to  his  earthly  life,  which  we  follow  in   close   imitation 

while  we  walk  in  love  to  God  and  love  to  the  brethren. The 

entire  verse  may  be  paraphrased  thus : — By  thus  dwelling  in  su- 
preme love  to  God  and  consequent  love  of  God's  children,  and  by 
thus  having  God  dwelling  in  us  (v.  16),  our  mutual  Christian  love 
for  each  other  is  developed  to  its  due  perfection,  so  that  we  may 
be  without  fear  as  to  the  day  of  final  judgment;  for  as  Jesus  lived 
in  this  world,  walking  in  supreme  love  to  the  Father  and  in  mu- 
tual love  to  his  people,  so  do  Ave  live  in  this  world,  and  are  there- 
fore exempt  from  slavish  fear  and  full  of  the  sweet  confidence  of 
peace  with  God  through  Christ. 

18.  There  is  no  fear  in  love;  but  perfect  love  casteth  out 
fear:  because  fear  hath  torment.  He  that  feareth  is  not 
made  perfect  in  love. 

19.  We  love  him,  because  he  first  loved  us. 

Such  love  expels  fear,  in  the  sense  of  anxiety,  the  spirit  of 
restless  apprehension.  Fear  of  this  sort  is  tormenting;  its  pres- 
ence testifies  that  the  soul  is  not  yet  perfect  in  love,  for  love 
surely  begets  confidence.  Spontaneously  a  SAveet  confidence  will 
spring  up  in  the  soul,  and  you  can  not  be  afraid  of  the  God  Avhom 
you  honestly,  deeply  love. 

In  V.  19 — the  reasoning  vmderlying  the  word  "  because  "  may 
be  understood  in  either  of  two  somewhat  different  senses ;  one 
comparatively  narrow ;  the  other  more  broad  and  general.  The 
narrow  makes  it  the  mere  love  of  gratitude,  as  I  gratefully  love  one 
Avho  gives  me  favors,  and  because  of  those  favors.  The  more  broad 
relation  puts  the  manifested  love  of  God  for  men,  in  the  order  of 
nature  and  causation,  before  the  love  we  bear  to  God.  "While  we 
Avere  yet  enemies  Christ  died  for  us.  "  We  have  known  and  be- 
licA-ed  the  love  that  God  hath  to  us"  (v.  16)  and  this  love  has 
subdued  the  enmity  of  our  hearts  toward  him;  laid  the  found- 
ation in  the  sacrifice  of  his  Son  for  our  pardon  and  peace  Avith 
God,  and  hence  for  all  the  love  of  human  souls  tOAvard  their  loving 

Father. Thus  all  our  love  for  him  has  foUoioed  Ms — comes 

after  it  in  the  order  of  nature ;  is  Avholly  indebted  to  God's  loA'e 
for  the  pro\dsions  Avhich  have  made  pardon  possible  and  for  the 


352  I,  JOHN.— CHAP.  V. 

influences  wliicli  have  subdued  our  enmity,  melted  our  hardness, 
and  molded  us  to  responsive  love. This  broad  view  of  the  re- 
lation of  God's  prior  love  to  our  posterior  love  seems  to  mc  most 
in  harmony  with  the  scope  of  this  chapter. 

20.  If  a  man  say,  I  love  God,  and  liateth  his  bi-other,  he 
is  a  liar :  for  he  that  loveth  not  his  brother  whom  he  hath 
seen,  how  can  he  love  God  Avhom  he  hath  not  seen? 

21.  And  this  commandment  have  we  from  him,  That  lie 
who  loveth  God  love  his  brother  also. 

The  doctrine  of  John  is  that  love  of  the  brethren  is  one  of  the 
most  decisive  and  most  easily  applied  tests  of  true  love  to  God. 
In  this  view  of  it  he  said  (3  :  14),  "  We  know  that  we  have 
passed  from  death  unto  life  because  we  love  the  brethren."  The 
same  doctrine  underlies  the  argument  in  3  :  18-21  ;  If  we  love 
the  brethren  in  deed  and  in  truth,  "  we  know  that  we  are  of  the 
truth,  and  shall  assure  our  hearts  before  him"  (God);  "for  if 
our  heart  condemn  us  not"  in  this  thing  (a  point  determined 
with  comparative  ease  and  certainty),  "  then  have  we  confidence 
toward  God."  Hence  in  view  of  this  great  and  decisive  test,  "  if 
a  man  say,  I  love  God,  and  hateth  his  brother,  he  is  a  liar  " — he 
ought  to  know  better ;  probably,  in  so  plain  a  case,  he  does,  and 
therefore  purposely  affirms  what  he  knoAvs  can  not  be  true — not 
so  much  self  deceived  as  a  real  deceiver. 

In  the  last  clause  of  v.  20,  John's  philosophy  seems  to  be  that 
seeing  in  the  order  of  nature  precedes  loving,  since  seeing  repre- 
sents the  most  perfect  knowledge  of  character  possible  to  us  in 
our  jireseut  state,  and  all  true  love  rests  on  such  knowledge  of 
character.  If  then,  having  seen  his  brother,  he  j'et  hates  him, 
how  can  he  pretend  to  love  God  whom  he  has  never  seen  ?  If 
your  heart  were  tuned  to  love  ;  if  the  Spirit  of  loving  were 
there,  ye  would  certainly  love  your  Christian  brother.  Not  lov- 
ing him,  it  is  more  than  vain  to  pretend  you  love  God  whom  of 

course  you  know  less  perfectly  than  your  brother. Hence  the 

pith  and  force  of  the  great  commandment:  If  ye  love  God,  love 
also  your  brother  who  is  one  of  God's  children. 


CHAPTER    V. 

Following  the  same  general  line  of  thought  as  in  the  previous 
chapter,  John  would  show  Christians  how  they  may  hnoiv  they 
love  God; — in  his  own  words  (v.  13) — "  that  ye  may  know  that  ye 
have  eternal  life,  and  that  ye  may  believe  on  the  name  of  the 
Son  of  God."     Incidentally,  he   speaks   also  of  the  blessedness 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  V.  353 

of  being  sons  of  God,  and  of  this  a.^surcd  confidence  iis  to  our  re- 
lationship to  him. 

1.  Whosoever  believe th  that  Jesus  is  tlie  Christ  is  born 
of  God :  and  every  one  that  loveth  him  that  begat  loveth 
him  also  that  is  begotten  of  him. 

Real  faith  in  Jesus  as  the  Christ  is  proof  of  the  new  birth  ; 
none  but  the  new-born  have  it.  Such  souls,  new-born  to  God, 
naturally  love  their  divine  Father,  and  consequently  love  .all  his 
spiritual  children.  Loving  God  as  their  Father,  they  love  all  who 
stand  in  like  relation  to  this  loving  Father.  This  is  the  well- 
known  law  of  the  human  family  through  all  ages.  The  love  of 
f;ither  and  mother  begets  love  to  the  brothers  and  sisters,  stand- 
ing in  the  same  common  relation,  and  born  into  the  fellowship  of 
the  same  mutual  love. 

2.  By  this  we  know  that  we  love  tlie  children  of  God, 
when  we  love  God,  and  keep  his  commandments. 

3.  For  this  is  the  love  of  God,  that  we  keep  his  com- 
mandments :  and  his  commandments  are  not  grievous. 

Noticeably  the  usual  order  is  here  reversed ;  for  whereas  John 
has  been  wont  to  make  love  of  brethren  the  proof  of  true  love  to 
God,  here  he  makes  love  to  God  and  the  keeping  of  his  com- 
mandments the  proof  for  the  genuineness  of  our  love  to  the 
brethren. As  usual,  keeping  God's  commandments  is  ac- 
counted the  evidence  of  love  to  God.  Jesus  had  taught  this  most 
fully  and  repeatedly  (e.  g.  John  14:  15,  21,  23,  24,  and   15  :    10, 

14)- 

"Ilis  commandments  are  not  grievous" — can  not  be,  coming 
from  such  a  source,  for  they  come  from  the  kindest  and  most  lov- 
ing of  Fathers  ; — are  not  in  their  nature,  for  they  enjoin  only 
love  and  good-will,  which,  the  heart  being  right,  are  of  all  things 
most  delightful; — are  not  therefore  in  the  conscious  experience 
of  the  obedient,  for  they  find  all  true  obedience  supremely  joy- 
ous— a  burden  (if  it  may  be  called  such)  delightfully  borne.  The 
service  of  love  is  a  perpetual  charm  to  the  loving  heart.  "It  is 
more  blessed  to  give  than  to  receive."  Blessed  are  they  who  try 
it,  for  they  shall  know  it,  as  no  theorizing  can  set  it  forth. 

4.  For  Avhatsoever  is  born  of  God  overcometh  the  world  : 
and  this  is  the  victory  that  overcometh  the  world,  even  our 
faith. 

5.  Wlio  is  he  that  overcometh  the  world,  but  he  that  be- 
lieveth  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God? 

Note  in  these  verses  the  logic  of  their  connection,  introduced 
by  "/b?' "  in  the  sense  of  because.  The  reason  why  we  keep  his 
commandments  and  do  not  find  them  "  grievous,"  is  that  everv 
thing  born  of  God  conquers  the  world.     Observe  next  the  use  of 


354  I.  JOHN.— ciiAr.  V. 

ichatsoeyev  instead  of  w/iosoever — the  neuter  pronoun  in  place  of 
the  more  usual  and  natural  masculine.  The  same  usage  appears 
in  the  gospel  of  John  (6  :  39,  and  17:2);  "  This  is  the  will  of 
him  that  sent  me,  that  of  every  thing  which  he  has  given  me,  I 
should  lose  nothing."  "  Thou  hast  given  him  power  as  to  all 
flesh  that  every  thing  thou  hast  given  him  he  should  give  eternal 
life  to  them."  The  neuter  seems  to  be  chosen  as  bearing  more 
decisively  the  sense  of  universality — absolutely  all  in  its  totality. 

"  Overcometh,"  translates  the  common  Greek  word  for  being 
victorious,  gaining  the  victory,  which  has  the  ring  of  M'ar,  battle, 
triumph.  John  has  used  it  in  this  epistle  before,  e.  g.  of  his 
Christian  young  men  (2:  13,  14)  who  had  conquered  ("over- 
come") the  Evil  One;  also  of  his  converts — "little  children,"  he 
calls  them — as  withstanding  successfully  the  Ij'iug  spirits,  false 
prophets,  who  had  assailed  them  (4  :  4). 

What,  then,  does  John  affirm  here  ?  That  every  soul,  really 
new-born  to  God,  becomes  victorious  over  the  world ;  and,  being 
thus  victorious,  keeps  God's  commandments  and  finds  them  not 
"  grievous."  When  the  power  of  the  world  over  the  heart  is 
broken,  we  obey  God's  commandments  with  case  and  delight — 
find  them  no  burden. 

How  is  this  victory  over  the  world  achieved  ?  John  has  but 
one  unsvrer—bi/  faith,  which  he  explains  to  be  "  believing  that  Je- 
sus is  the  Son  of  God,"  and  of  course  taking  hold  of  his  strength 
as  such.  Ye  can  conqtt^r  the  loorld  because  Jesus  can  give  j^ou 
this  victory,  and  will,  if  ye  trust  him  by  faith  for  the  help  ye 
need.  First,  John  affirms  this;  then  boldly  challenges  every  op- 
ponent to  show  a  case  of  such  victory  over  the  world  achieved  by 
any  other  force  than  this.  Let  all  the  human  philosophies  be  in- 
voked, or  all  the  educational  forces,  or  all  the  social  powers;  can 
they  produce  one  human  soul  lifted  by  their  training,  and  by 
their  boasted  forces,  into  real  victory  over  the  world  ?     Such   [ 

take  to  be  a  fair  exposition  of  these  precious  words. Will  the 

reader  accept  the  suggestion  that  this  truth  is  in  the  best  sense 
intensely,  gloriously,  practical  ?  It  comes  to  us  in  our  moral 
weakness;  finds  us  encompassed  with  temptations  from  without; 
weakened  perhaps  by  moral  defeats  from  within  ;  put  to  hard  con- 
flicts against  many  a  subtle,  stubborn  foe,  and  sometimes  not  a 
little  discouraged; — -yet  what  does  it  say?  Its  words  are  not 
many,  but  they  are  wonderfully  pregnant  with  meaning: — "  vic- 
tory  over  the  world'";  "victory  through  faith  in  the  Son  of 
God"!  The  truth  put  into  these  few  words  meets  our  case  per- 
fectly. Let  it  scatter  our  fears  to  the  winds,  and  lift  our  souls 
into  the  calm  assurance  of  trust,  peace,  victory ! 

Some  readers  will  ask  how  these  verses  bear  upon  the  question 

of  a  sinless   Christian   experience  in  this  life. To  meet  this 

question  briefly,  1  suggest — (1)  The  passage  must  be  treated  in 
the  same  way  as  the  analogous  passages  (that  above  3  :  4,  and  that 
below  5  :  18) :  "  Whosoever  is  born  of  God  doth  not  commit  sin," 
etc.  -  Much  if  not  all  that  was  said  in  exposition  of  those  words 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  V.  355 

is  pertinent  here. (2)  Whatever  John  means  by  "  overcoming 

the  world,"  he  declares  to  be  tlie  experience,  not  of  a  few  only  ot 
God's  children,  but  of  all.  lie  seems  to  have  no  thought  of  two 
classes  of  real  Christians — one  sanctified,  and  the  other  not  sanc- 
tified. All  that  he  embraces  under  the  words — "  overcome  the 
world  " — he  represents  as  the  common  experience  of   all  those 

who  are  truly  new-born  to  God. (3)  It  is  supposable  that  in 

his  age  pi'ofessed  Christians  were  more  positive  in  character  than 
in  our  times;  that  the  class  unfortunately  but  too  well  known  to 
us,  who  are  so  world-loving,  so  much  conformed  to  its  spirit  and 
usages  as  to  involve  their  piety  in  grave  doubt,  may  have  been  in 
his  time  mostly  unknown  ;  or  perhaps  John  would  say  of  them 
as  Paul  of  Demas — "  hath  forsaken  me,  having  loved  this  present 
world,"  and  therefore  would  not  take  them  at  all  into  account  as 
having  been  born  of  God.  13c  this  as  it  may,  John  does  not  seem 
to  provide  any  place  in  the  Christian  fold  for  those  who  did  not 
in  some  very  positive  sense  gain  the  victory  over  the  world. 
What  he  would  say  as  to  the  imperfections  in  love  and  in  service, 
in  spirit  and  in  lite,  among  those  who  in  the  main  were  conquei'- 
ors  of  the  world,  the  flesh,  and  the  devil,  perhaps  he  has  not  told 
us.  It  does  not  appear  that  he  had  this  point  definitely  in  his 
mind,  and  it  behooves  us  not  to  press  his  words  too  severely  in 
our  efforts  to  apply  them  to  points  which  he  may  not  have  con- 
templated. Yet  I  am  sure  we  may  assume  that  very  glaring  im- 
perfections;  that  very  manifest  sins;  that  positive,  open  conform- 
ity to  the  world  in  spirit  and  life,  must  not  be  forced  into  har- 
mony with  his  words,  "  overcometh  tlie  world." 

6.  This  i.s  he  that  came  by  Avater  and  blood,  evoi  Jesus 
Christ ;  not  by  water  only,  but  by  Avater  and  blood.  And 
it  is  the  Spirit  that  beareth  witness,  because  the  Spirit  is 
truth. 

Water  as  related  to  the  spiritual  life  is  universally  the  symbol 
of  moral  cleansing;  blood,  of  the  propitiation  wrought  by  Christ's 
atoning  death.  No  other  interpretation  of  these  words  can  be 
thought  of.  The  usage  of  the  Scriptures — the  Old  Testament  and 
the  New  alike — goes  solid  in  support  of  this  simple  construction 
and  application  of   these  Avords.     The  reader  may  refer  to  my 

notes  of  John  3  :  5  for  the  usage  of  the  word  "  water." The 

Spirit  of  truth  bears  witness  to  these  great  facts  as  to  the  work 
of  Christ.  It  is  his  mission  to  teach  these  truths  and  to  impress 
them  in  their  living  power  on  human  Iiearts.  His  special  wit- 
nessing agency  came  after  Christ's  ascension,  in  and  after  the 
scenes  of  the  great  Pentecost. 

7.  For  there  are  three  that  bare  record  [in  heaven,  ilie 
Father,  the  Word,  and  the  Hdij  GJiost :  and  these  three  are  one. 


356  I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  V. 

8.  And  there  are  three  that  hear  ivltness  in  earUi]  tlie  Spirit, 
and  the  Avater,  and  the  blood :  and  these  three  agree  in  one. 

The  words  here  put  in  italics  and  inchidcd  Avithin  brackets  are 
unquestionably  spurious.  No  important  manuscript  contains 
them;  none  of  the  really  ancient  versions  have  them.  They  ut- 
terly lack  the  -authorities  requisite  to  entitle  them  to  a  place  in 
the  sacred  text.  No  modern  critic,  versed  in  such  questions,  de- 
fends them  as  genuine.'* 

These  vs^ords  not  only  lack  external  (historical)  authority ; 
they  are  also  entirely  out  of  place  in  the  Apostle's  argument. 
He  is  here  producing  the  testimonies  for  Christ  which  are 
brought  out  on  the  earth,  before  human  eyes;  not  those  which 
supposably  might  be  brought  forth  in  heaven.  For,  it  may  well 
be  asked,  What  have  his  readers  to  do  with  the  latter  ?  And 
how  can  it  be  pertinent  to  ask  them  to  believe  in  Jesus  on  the 
strength  of  witnessing  testimonies  to  him  which  are  seen  or 
heard  only  in  heaven? 

9.  If  we  receive  the  witness  of  men,  the  witness  of  God  is 
greater:  for  this  is  the  witness  of  God  Avhich  he  hath  testi- 
fied of  his  Son. 

Following  the  course  of  thought  in  the  antecedent  context  (vs. 
6,  8)  this  "  witness  of  God  "  must  be  specially  that  of  the  "  Spirit" 
as  borne  emphatically  after  Christ's  ascension.  That  God's  testi- 
mony to  his  Son  through  the  Spirit  should  be  accounted  greater 
than  that  of  any  man  or  even  of  all  men  is  most  obvious,  and  its 
weight  ought  to  be  resistless. 

10.  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  of  God  hath  the  witness 
in  himself:  he  that  believeth  not  God  hath  made  him  a 
liar;  because  he  believeth  not  the  record  that  God  gave  of 
his  Son, 

To  every  believing  soul  there  is  a  form  of  testimony  unknown 
to  the  ungodly;  peculiar  to  the  believer;  viz.  that  which  he  has 
in  himself.  He  knows  there  is  a  joy  and  peace  in  believing 
which  no  delusion  could  ever  give ;  he  knows  that  through  Jesus 
he  has  communion  with  God ;  he  knows  that  for  Jesus'  sake 
God   hears  his  prayer.     He    is  deeply  conscious   of   a  sj^iritual 

*  According  to  Luecke  (Eps.  John,  page  267-8),  these  words  are 
found  only  in  two  Greek  manuscripts,  and  those  quite  insignificant 
— one  dating  only  from  the  sixteenth  century,  and  the  other  without 
any  weight  of  critical  antiquity. See  also  Neander  on  this  Epis- 
tle, page  289. 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  V,  357 

pnwci-  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  of  which  he  can  say  (with  Dr.  Thomas . 
Scott)  :   "  I  could  as  soon  believe  there  is  no  Holy  Ghost  as  to 
doubt   his  personal  presence  in  my  heart "   in  connection  with 
certain  truths  of  God's  woixi  to  which  he  referred. 

In  this  self-conscious,  witnessing  testimony,  he  who  is  a  stran- 
ger to  God  intermcddleth  not.  It  lies  wholly  outside  the  pale  of 
his  conscious  experience.  He  will  know  what  it  is  only  when, 
in  the  honest  sincerity  of  his  heart,  he  too  believes  on  the  Son 
of  God. 

The  last  clause  of  this  verse  looks  toward  external  testimonies 
only.  He  who  believes  not  makes  God  a  liar,  inasmuch  as  he 
virtually  charges  him  with  giving  false  testimony  as  to  his  Son. 
God's  record  as  to  his  Son  has  been  clear,  explicit,  and  in  point 
of  significance,  unmistakable.  He  therefore  who  will  not  believe 
this  record,  virtually  arraigns  the  witness  on  the  charge  of  false- 
hood. 

11.  And  this  is  the  record,  that  God  hath  given  to  U3 
eternal  life,  and  this  life  is  in  his  Son. 

12.  He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  life;  and  he  that  hath  not 
the  Son  of  God  hath  not  life. 

All  the  exposition  these  plain  words  can  need  will  be  found  in 
John's  gospel  in  such  passages  as  17  :  3,  and  3  :  36,  and  5  :  24—26. 
Our  author  borrows  them  substantially  from  his  Master. 

13.  These  things  have  I  written  unto  you  that  believe  on 
the  name  of  the  Son  of  God ;  that  ye  may  know  that  ye 
have  eternal  life,  and  that  ye  may  believe  on  the  name  of 
the  Sou  of  God. 

John  is  a  writer  of  definite  aims,  lie  knows  what  results  he 
wishes  to  secure.  He  stated  his  object  in  his  gospel  history  (20: 
30,  31);   he  does  the  same  as  to  this  epistle  here. 

The  most  reliable  authorities  omit  from  this  verse  the  last 
clause — "  and  that  ye  may  believe  on  the  name  of  the  Son  of 
God."  This  being  omitted,  the  declared  object  of  this  epistle 
(if  the  statement   refers  to   it  in  whole)  is  one — "  that  ye  may 

know  that  ye  have  eternal  life." Under  this  knowing  are  two 

supposably  distinct  points,  viz.  (a)  Knowing  that  this  salvation 
through  Christ  means  eternal  life,  provides  for  it,  secures  it;  and 
(5)  Knowing  each  for  himself  that  he  has  a  personal  interest  in 
this  salvation.  We  have  seen  that  this  epistle  brings  out  these 
personal  proofs  or  tests  of  piety  with  remarkable  fullness.  No 
other  portion  of  God's  word  makes  this  point  so  prominent. 
"  Hereby  we  Jcnoio  that  we  dwell  in  him  and  he  in  us  "  (4  :  13) ; 
"  By  this  we  Jcnotv  that  we  love  the  children  of  God,"  etc.  (5:  2) ; 
"  We  know  that  Ave  have  passed  from  death  unto  life,  because  we 
love  the  brethren  "  (3 :  14).  Such  is  the  strain  of  this  epistle. 
16 


358  I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  V. 

14.  And  this  is  the  confidence  that  we  have  in  him,  tliat, 
if  we  ask  any  thing  according  to  his  will,  he  heareth  us  : 

15.  And  if  we  know  that  he  hear  us,  whatsoever  Ave  ask, 
we  know  that  we  have  the  petitions  that  we  desired  of  him. 

"Confidence" — yet  the  Greek  -word  ia  more  siiirgestive  than 
this  for  the  case  of  prayer,  signifying  the  freedrrm  of  speech 
which  is  felt  toward  an  intimate  friend — the  talking  familiarly 
with  one  as  when  we  know  and  can  fully  trust  him.  In  Heb.  4  : 
16  our  version  puts  it — "  come  with  boldness  " — but  this  should 
be  taken  in  the  good  sense — a  free  utterance  with  no  restraint  of 
fear. 

In  the  conditional  clause — "  If  we  ask  any  thing  according  to 
his  will " — we  need  to  inquire — Is  it  the  manner  of  asking,  or 
the  sort  of  thing  asked,  that  must  be  "  according  to  his  will"  ? 
The  words  might  refer  to  either — i.  e.  as  to  the  manner — whether 
in  the  name  of  Jesus  or  in  our  own  ;  as  to  motive — whether  for 
the  glory  of  God  or  for  our  own  ;  for  the  interests  of  God's  king- 
dom, or  to  consume  upon  our  lusts.  Or  on  the  other  hand,  it 
may  refer  specially  to  the  thing  asked — the  blessing  sought. 
The  next  verse,  pursuing  the  same  subject,  saying — "  If  we  knoAV 
that  he  hear  lis,  whatsoever  we  ask  " — indicates  that  the  latter  is 
the  sense  intended.  The  thing  we  ask  must  be  according  to  his 
will. 

In  its  practical  bearings,  the  question  of  unsurpassed  interest 
as  to  prayer  is  that  of  its  li7niiaiions.  As  put  here  the  limita- 
tion is — ''according  to  his  will" — it  must  be  for  things  in  har- 
mony with   the  will  of  God. Now  this  limitation  can  never 

disturb  or  embarrass  any  true  child  of  God  in  the  least.  For 
he  will  always  say — I  can  desire  nothing,  can  ask  nothing  save 
what  is  agreeable  to  my  Father's  will.  I  have  unbounded  con- 
fidence in  both  his  love  and  his  wisdom.  I  know  his  love  will 
give  me  any  thing  I  need  if  he  can  do  it  wisely,  and  I  know 

his  wisdom  never  can  misjudge. ^Moreover,  if  what  seems  to 

be  my  interest  clashes  Avith  other  greater  interests,  I  withdraw 
my  request.  Let  God  be  the  judge;  let  him  favor  the  more  im- 
portant interests,  whatever    may  befall    me    and    mine. Yet 

further :  In  this  passage  John  seems  not  a^vare  that  these  words 
— "anything  according  to  his  will" — amount  to  any  limitation 
whatever.  For,  mark  how  he  speaks  in  the  next  verse:  "  If  we 
know  that  he  hear  us  loliatever  ive  ask  " — be  it  what  it  may. 
Observe,  he  does  not  say — Since  the  promise  includes  only  things 
according  to  his  will,  we  must  be  studiously  careful  to  limit  our 
requests  to  such  things,  and  also  our  expectation  of  success  ; — 
this  he  does  not  say.  Apparently  it  had  escaped  him  that  he 
had  said  any  thing  about  this  limitation.  Eeally  he  does  not 
seem  to  think  it  amounts  to  any  restriction  upon  prayer.  Prob- 
ably as  it  lay  in  his  mind,  it  was  no  restriction  at  all.  Things 
out  of  harmony  with  the  will  of  God  have  no  place  in  praj-er. 
We  would  neither  ask  them,  nor  have  them  if  we  might.     Hence 


I.  JOIL\.— CHAP.  V.  359 

wc  como  iinombavrassed  to  the  broad,  magnificent,  glorious  con- 
clusion— "  We  may  know  tliat  we  have  the  petitions  that  we  de- 
sired of  hiiu."  This  is  our  confidence  toward  God  in  the  mat- 
ter of  prayer.  He  hears  us  wliatsoever  we  ask.  We  can  not 
wisli  for  any  thing  other  than  M'hat  is  according  to  his  will. 
Those  things  that  are  outside  of  his  will — out  of  harmony  with 
his  wisdom  and  love — are  not  what  we  desire.  If  we  were  to 
ask  for  them  it  Avould  be  our  mistake — made  through  misappre- 
hension of  his  will ;  and  we  shall  thank  him  forever  for  with- 
holding these  things.  If  we  err  in  wisdom  of  judgment,  we  re- 
joice that  he  can  never  err,  but  Avill  certainly  set  the  matter 
right  by  withholding  whatever  it  would  be  unwise  to  give. 

16.  If  any  man  see  his  brother  sin  a  sin  which  is  not  unto 
death,  he  shall  ask,  and  he  shall  give  him  life  for  them  that 
sin  not  unto  death.  There  is  a  sin  unto  death  :  I  do  not 
say  that  he  shall  pray  for  it. 

17.  All  unrighteousness  is  sin :  and  there  is  a  sin  not  unto 
death. 

These  vei'ses  must  be  put  in  their  natural  connection  with 
the  two  next  preceding.  John  would  say — Observe  how  this 
doctrine  of  prayer  applies  in  reference  to  prayer  for  a  sinning 
brother  in  the  church.  There  are  certain  possible  limitations 
here  that  should  be  understood.  All  classes  of  sinners  can  not 
be  reached  and  saved  by  prayer.     There  are  some  sins  that  are 

naturally  "unto  death;"  for  such,  no  prayer  can  avail. This 

case  is  described  in  terms  so  genci-al,  that  no  small   difference 

of   opinion    has    existed    as    to  its  true  interpretation. Some 

points  however  are  mado  clear,  e.  g.  that  tliis  sin  is  that  of  "a 
b«->ther,"  doubtless  a  brother  in  the  Christian  fraternity.  One 
who  thought  so  much  as  John  did  of  love  for  the  brethren 
would  have  the  deepest  sorrow  of  his  soul  moved  by  the  sin  of 
a  Christian  brother,  especially  if  it  were  of  such  sort  as  must 

greatly  imperil  his  salvation. Note  also  that  this  must  be  a 

sin,  not  of  the  secret  thought  merely,  but  of  the  visib]fijife,  for 
the  "man"  is  supposed  to  "see"  it.  Further,  the  doctrine  is 
that  some  sins  are  "unto  death,"  while  other  sins  are  "not  unto 
death;"  and  also,  that  this  distinction  is  one  which  the  pray- 
ing brother  can  make.  Christians  are  assuijied  to  be  able  to 
classify  the  sins  they  may  see  in  their  brethren  as  to  this  point. 
If  one  sees  the  sin  to  be  "not.  unto  death,"  he  shall  jn-ay,  ami 
life  shall  come  in  answer  to  his  prayer.  l>ut  if  he  judge  it  to  be 
a  sin  "unto  death,"  John  says — "I  do  not  say  that  he  shall  pray 
for  it."  I  could  not  enjoin  it  as  his  duty.  Perhaps  this  negative 
statement  purposely  leaves  the  praying  brother  to  bo  governed  by 
his  own  inward  sense  of  the  case,  by  the  impulses  of  the  Spirit 
within  his  own  soul.  But  no  inspired  direction  enjoins  praj^er 
in  such  a  case,  though  possibly  John  implies — does  not  peremp- 


360  I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  V. 

torily  forbid  it.  Tliis  latitude  however  can  be  at  best  only  hypo- 
thetical. 

Are  Ave  competent  to  go  into  this  discrimination  and  draw  the 
line,  even  proximately,  between  sins  "unto  death"  and  sins  "not 
unto  death  "  ?  The  subject  is  too  momentous  to  be  left  under 
any  darkness  if  it  be  possible  to  get  light  upon  it.  If  some  sins 
are  really  "  unto  death,"  so  manifestly  mortal  that  no  prayer 
for  the  sinner  can  be  even  advisable,  much  less  available,  then 
surely  it  were  Avell  to  know  what  they  are — and  let  all  men  take 
warning ! 

All  light  on  this  point — that  is  light — must  come  from  God's 

■\Yord. We  readily  recall  the  awfully  solemn  words  of  Jesus 

respecting  the  sin  of  blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost  (Matt. 
12:  31,  32,  and  Mark  3:  28-30,  and  Luke  12:  10).  They  show 
that  sinners  may  insult,  traduce,  malign,  resist,  the  Holy  Ghost, 
beyond  possible  forgiveness.  That  sin  must  surely  be  "  unto 
death"! 

The  writer  to  the  Hebrews  (10:  26-29)  defines  a  sin  of  similar 
sort  in  the  words — "  For  if  we  sin  willfully  after  we  have  re- 
ceived the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  there  remaineth  no  more  sac- 
rifice for  sins,  but  a  certain  fearful  looking  for  of  judgment  and 
fiery  indignation."  .  .  this  sinner  "  having  trodden  under  foot 
the  Son  of  God  and  counted  the  blood  of  the  covenant  an  un- 
holy thing,  and  do)ie  despite  to  the  Spirit  of  grace." Probably 

the  same  sin  is  in  his  eye  in  6  :  4-6;  "For  it  is  impossible  for 
those  who  were  once  enlightened,  etc.,  ...  if  they  shall 
fall  away  to  renew  them  again  unto  repentance,  seeing  they  cru- 
cify unto  themselves  the  Son  of  God  afresh,  and  put  him  to  an  open 
shame." Peter  held  the  same  views  of  a  certain  class  of  apos- 
tates (2  Epis.  2:  20-22):  "If  after  they  have  escaped  the  pollu- 
tions of  the  world  through  the  knowledge  of  the  Lord  and  Savior 
Jesus  Christ,  they  are  again  entangled  therein  and  overcome,  the 
latter  end  is  worse  with  them  than  the  beginning,"  etc.  We  may 
remember  that  Paul  recognizes  a  fearful  "  peradventure  "  on  the 
point  whether  God  will  give  certain  opposers  repentance  (2  Tim. 
2 :  25,  26),  and  Peter  expresses  a  similar  doubt  in  the  case  of 
Simon  Magus  whether,  even  if  he  were  to  pray  himself,  this 
wicked  thought  of  his  heart  could  be  forgiven; — "Pray  God" 
(said  he)  "  if,  perhaps,  it  may  be." 

Underlying  all  these  passages  is  the  doctrine  that  some  sinners, 
especially  apostates  once  greatly  enlightened,  are  past  recovery. 
Their  sins  are  "  unto  death."  So  far  as  appears  from  the  descrip- 
tive points  given  of  these  cases  the  fatal  elements  are — the  degree 
oflight_sinned  against,  and  the  bearing  of  the  sin  against  the 
Spirit Jif^od.  The  work  of  the  Spirit  in  this  world  is  so  deli- 
cate, so  vital,  so  sacred,  and  so  much  depends  on  his  being  treated 
with  due  honor,  that  God  must  and  will  shield  him  from  insult 
and  his  work  from  dishonor,  though  it  cost  the  eternal  damnation 
of  every  blasphemer  and  contemner  of  his  name  ! Hence  Chris- 
tians p.rc  to  judge  what  sins  are  unto  death,  mainly,  1  ajiprehend, 


I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  V.  3G1 

by  these  tests — The  light  sinned  ngainst;  and  the  abuse  of  the 
Spirit  of  God. 

We  ought  to  note  that  one  ol)ject  of  John  in  these  verses  is  the 
relief  of  praying  Christians.  For  if  they  were  to  pray  without 
regard  to  this  discrimination,  it  might  become  terribly  agoni- 
zing, perplexing,  and  even  stumbling,  to  find  that  their  prayer 
availed  nothing,  and  not  to  understand  the  reason  of  this  failure. 

18.  We  know  that  ■\vliosoevcr  is  born  of  God  sinneth  not; 
but  he  that  is  begotten  of  God  keepeth  himself,  and  that 
wicked  one  toucheth  him  not. 

19.  And  we  know  that  we  are  of  God,  and  the  whole 
world  lieth  in  Avickedness. 

Are  these  verses  related  in  thought  to  the  two  nest  preceding? 
Usually,  this  should  bo  assumed  unless  the  nature  of  the  case  for- 
bid, ik'ing  assumed  here,  we  may  put  the  logic  of  the  connec- 
tion thus: — Those,  who  "sin  unto  death"  are  not  of  those  who 
have  been  "born  of  God."  We  know  that  those  thus  born  to  God 
do  not  sin  fatally — "  unto  death."  Every  such  new-born  soul 
keepeth  himself  through  grace,  and  that  wicked  one — the  devil — 
toucheth  him  not.  Wide  as  the  poles  apart  are  these  two  classes; 
we.  Christians,  are  of  God,  made  his  sons  by  his  regenerating 
grace  :  the  whole  world  licth  in  wickedness.  The  one  class  arc 
under  G-od's  jDrotectinghand;  the  other  are  under  Satan. 

20.  And  we  know  that  the  Son  of  God  is  come,  and  hatli 
given  us  an  understanding,  that  we  may  know  him  tliat  is 
true  ;  and  we  are  in  him  that  is  true,  even  in  his  Son  Jesus 
Christ.     This  is  the  true  God,  and  eternal  life. 

21.  Little  children,  keep  yourselves  from  idols.     Amen. 

The  great  points  of  truth  which  "  we  knoio,"  and  which  have 
wrought  these  transformations  of  character  and  state  in  us^ 
briefly  put  here — are — that  the  Son  of  God  is  come  into  our  world ; 
has  given  us  an  understanding  of  the  true  God;  and  has  brought 
us  into  relations  to  God,  best  expressed  by  the  words,  "  we  are  in 

liimy Moreover,  we  are  in  him,  the  true  God,  by  being  in  his 

Son  Jesus  Christ.  First  knowing  and  receiving  his  Son,  we  have 
come  to  know,  receive,  and  love  the  Father.  Being  in  the  Father 
comes  of  first  being  in  the  Son.  So  intimate  and  so  peculiar  is 
the  relation  of  the  Father  to  the  Son  that  we  can  scarcely  distin- 
guish even  in  thought  the  being  in  the  Son  from  being  in  the 
Father  who  sent  him. 

On  the  clause — "  This  ia  the  true  God  and  eternal  life,"  we  meet 
the  nice  critical  question  whether  the  pronoun  "this"  refers  to 
the  Father,  spoken  of  before  as  "  him  that  is  true,"  or  to  the  Son. 

In  favor  of  referring  it  to  the  Son  are  these  considerations: — 
(a.)  That  Son  is  the  nearest  antecedent.  Usually  this  fact  is  de- 
cisive.  (5.)  The  Son  is  known  in  the  writings  of  John  as  "the 


362  I.  JOHN.— CHAP.  v. 

life;  "  (John  1:  4)  "The  life  is  the  light  of  men;"  and  (1  Julin 
1 :  2)  "The  life  was  manifested;  "  "  We  show  unto  you  the  eter- 
nal life  who  was  with  the  Father,"  etc.  Thus  we  see  that  the 
8on  is  called  not   only   "  the   h'fe,"  Lut  explicitly — "  the  eternal 

life." (c.)  A  third  consideration  of  great  force  is,  that  John 

having  twice  already  in  this  one  verse  spoken  of  the  Father  as 
"the  true  One,"  i.  e.  of  course — the  true  God,  and  having  said 
this  in  most  explicit,  emphatic  terms,  there  is  not  the  least  occa- 
sion to  repeat  it  again.     To  do  so  adds  nothing  to  the  thought, 

l)ut  really  weakens  his  statement. Bear  in  mind  John  has  said — 

The  Son  of  God  has  come;  he  has  made  known  to  us  the  true 
One — the  really  true  God.  We  have  come  to  be  in  this  true 
God — i.  e.  by  first  being  in  his  Son.  Having  said  all  this,  is  it 
even  supposable  that  John  should  close  with  saying — This  person- 
age whom  I  have  called  "the  true  One  is  the  true  God?  Kather 
is  not  this  his  thought?  This  Jesus  the  Son  who  has  thus  re- 
vealed God  to  us  and  brought  us  into  fellowship  with  him,  is  also 
himself  really  God  and  the  Eternal  Life. 

The  objections  made  to  this  construction  are  chiefly  doctrinal : 
i.  e.  of  this  sort ;  This  passage  can  not  be  construed  to  say  that 
the  Son  is  "the  true  God"  because  he  is  not  and  can  not  be. 
There  is  but  one  true  God  ;  and  to  make  Jesus  one   is  to  make 

two. John  has  not  told  us  definitely  how  he  Avoiild  meet  this 

objection,  but  has  left  us  the  fact  with  no  attempt  at  metaphys- 
ical explanation.— From  his  silence  on  this  point  it  is  probably 
safe  to  infer  that  we  shall  need  the  light  of  a  brighter  world  and 
perhaps  the  power  of  more  acute,  discriminating,  comprehensive 
thought  ere  we  shall  "  know  the  Almighty  to  perfection." 

The  closing  words  are — "  Little  children,  keep  yourselves  from 
idols."  Is  this  warning  connected  in  thought  with  the  subject 
then  in  hand  ?  Perhaps  so ;  perhaps  not.  In  that  age — idolatry 
being  every-where  about  them — it  could  never  be  amiss  to  give 
this  warning.  Yet  a  certain  connection  is  supposable — say  with 
V.   19;   "The  whole  world  lieth  in  wickedness;"  we  who  are  of 

God  must  needs  withstand  idolatry  on  every  side. Or  possibly 

with  v.  20 ;  We  worship  the  Father  as  God ;  the  Son  also  as  the 
true  God;  beyond  these,  none.  Beware  of  being  drawn  to  the 
worship  of  idols. 


IjS-TEODUCTIOK 


SECOND   AND  THIRD  EPISTLES   OF   JOHN. 


These  two  short  private  letters  are  supposed  to  have  been 
"written  by  the  aged  Apostle  John.  One  is  addressed  to  a 
sister  in  the  church  whose  proper  name  I  take  to  have  been 
Cyria  [Gr.  Kuria] ;  and  the  other  to  a  brother  (apparently  a 
layman)  whose  name  is  given — Gains.  The  residence  of  nei- 
ther is  given.  We  can  only  assume  that  both  resided  within 
what  we  may  call  John's  diocese — within  the  circle  of 
churches  under  his  apostolic  supervision,  for  with  each  he 
manifestly  had  some  personal  acquaintance  ;  had  seen  them 
both  before  and  hoped  to  again.  Neither  Avero  poor  in 
this  world's  goods,  for  both  letters  assume  that  they  were 
exercising  a  somewhat  large  hospitality,  receiving  Christian 
strangers  to  their  houses.  Indeed,  the  special  purpose  of 
each  letter  assumed  this — in  the  case  of  Cyria  suggesting  the 
danger  and  nnwisdom  of  receiving  into  her  house  and  to  her 
hospitality  men  Avho  brought  sojne  other  doctrine  than  the 
truth  in  Jesus ;  and  in  the  case  of  Gains,  that  he  should  re- 
ceive to  his  house,  to  his  confidence  and  sympathy,  certain 
traveling  missionaries — perhaps  self-sent — yet  laboring  for 
Christ's  name  and  taking  nothing  of  the  Gentiles  toward 
their  support.  Virtually  therefore  this  Avas  an  apostolic  cer- 
tificate of  Christian  character  and  of  recommendation  to  the 
confidence  and  aid  of  this  hospitable  and  worthy  lay  brother. 

Thus  the  object  of  these  private  letters  is  made  quite 
plain  from  their  contents. 

As  to  the  author  of  these  letters — supposed  to  have  been 
John  the  Apostle,  let  us  haquire  on  ivhat  grounds  they  are  as- 
ci'ibed  to  him. 

His  name   is   not  here.     The  writer   only  calls   himself 

(363) 


364  INTRODUCTION  TO  JOHN  II.  AND  III. 

"the  elder"  (presbuteros),  Avliich  may  mean  either  an  old 
man  or  an  elder  [officer]  in  the  church.  John  lived  to  a 
great  age ;  at  the  date  of  this  writing  was  probably  better 
known  through  all  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor  as  the  aged 
one,  than  by  any  other  appellation.  For  some  unknown 
reason  John  was  always  rcmarkal)ly  reserved  in  the  use  of 
his  own  name.  He  never  gives  it  in  his  own  writings.  In 
a  number  of  passages  his  gospel  refers  to  himself,  but  never 
even  Avhispers  his  own  name  John.  The  first  epistle  is  en- 
tii-ely  written  without  name.  It  would  therefore  be  aside 
from  his  habit  to  give  his  name  in  these  epistles. 

The  historical  evidence  that  John  wrote  these  epistles  is  pe- 
culiar ; — I  can  not  say  defective  or  suspicious.  By  some  of 
the  early  Fathers  they  were  classed  among  what  Avere  tech- 
nically called  "  iAe  antilegomena,"  i.  c.  the  disputed  books. 
They  did  not  from  the  very  first  obtain  universal  reception 
among  the  writings  of  Apostolic  men. 

But  under  the  circumstances  this  fact  does  not  in  the  least 
disparage  their  inspired  authority.  It  is  only  what  should 
be  expected.  For  consider — They  were  merely  private  let- 
ters. They  belonged  to  John's  private  corresjjondence  with 
individual  parties.  If  they  had  been  written  to  a  church, 
e.  g.  the  Church  of  Ephesus,  they  would  have  come  into  no- 
toriety at  once.  First  read  in  the  religious  assemblies  of 
that  church  and  of  course  endorsed  by  them ;  then  coj)ied 
and  sent  to  other  churches,  they  would  soon  find  their  way 
into  general  confidence  and  use.  But  both  these  were 
"private  letters.  Cyria  and  Gains  knew  the  writer;  each  wel- 
comed John's  letter,  and  doubtless  kept  it  as  a  family  treas- 
ure. But  probably  at  first  there  was  no  demand  on  them 
to  send  their  private  correspondence  to  be  read  in  public 
church  assemblies.  In  fact  the  letters  were  not  only  private 
in  their  address  but  personal  rather  than  public  in  their 
character.  How  they  ever  became  known  to  the  Christian 
public  does  not  appear ;  doubtless  it  was  a  work  of  time. 
Not  that  they  lacked  merit,  for  they  were  indeed  treasures, 
and  by  and  by  good  men  abroad  came  to  know  and  appre- 
ciate them. Most  of  the  epistles  in  our  New  Testament 

were  public  in  nature  and  intent,  and  consequently  were  in- 
trodnced  at  once  to  public  notice  and  confidence.  Paul 
wrote  four  letters  to  individuals ;  but  three  of  these  were  to 
young  ministers  (Timothy  and  Titus)  in  responsible  positions, 
under  every  inducement  to  bring  these  letters  before  their 
churches.     His  letter  to  Philemon  is  the  only  one  analogous 


INTRODUCTION  TO  JOHN  II.  AND  III.  365 

to  these  two  from  John.  But  Philemon  was  in  a  prominent 
position,  for  there  was  a  "chux*ch  in  his  house"  (v.  2),  and 
he  Avas  personally  known  to  a  considei'able  circle  of  Paul's 

fellow-laborers  (vs.  23,  24). Hence  that  these  two  private 

letters  from  John  should  be  rather  slow  in  obtaining  a  gen- 
eral reception  among  ins2:)ired  epistles  is  precisely  what 
should  be  expected.     Any  different  result  would  be  prima 

facie  suspicious. The  fact  that  their  general  reception 

took  time  testifies  to  the  watchful  care  of  those  early  churches 
in  regard  to  admitting  written  documents  into  their  canon 
of  inspired  Avritiugs. 

Ultimately  the  historical  evidence  in  favor  of  these  epis- 
tles became  abundant  and  most  satisfactory.  The  church 
and  school  at  Alexandria  (Egypt)  indorsed  them  strongly. 
Clement,  Origen,  Dyonisius — successively  at  the  head  of  that 
great  Theological  School — received  them.  There  is  a  cer- 
tain life-likeness  in  the  indorsement  given  by  "Bishop  Alex- 
ander of  Alexandria  "  Avho,  in  a  letter  missive  to  the  bishops 
of  his  diocese,  justifies  the  excommunication  of  Arius  and 
his  adherents  by  a  direct  appeal  to  2  John  10.*  So  also  in 
a  synod  held  at  Carthage  under  Cyprian,  on  the  then  im- 
portant question  of  baptizing  heretics,  one  Aurelius,  Bishop 
of  Chullabi,  gave  his  vote  in  the  words  of  2  John  9,  saying — 
"John  in  his  own  epistle  lays  down  this  doctrine,  saying," 

etc.  f The  testimony  of  Irenseus,  whose  early  residence 

was  in  Asia  Minor,  is  emphatic  and  decisive; — "For  John, 
a  disciple  of  the  Lord,  hurls  his  condemnation  ['damna- 
tionem ']  against  these  [heretics],  nor  would  he  allow  a  God- 
Sj^eed  ['  ave ']  to  be  said  to  them,"  etc. 

JMuch  more  testimony  might  be  adduced :  let  this  suffice. 

Of  the  internal  evidence  that  these  letters  were  from  the 
same  John  who  wrote  the  gospel  and  the  first  epistle,  it  can 
scarcely  be  necessary  to  say  a  word.  Every  reader  Avill  see 
the  sentiments,  the  phrases,  and  the  loving  heart  of  the 
same  John.     No  other  Apostle  Avrote  so;  indeed,  no  other 


Luecke,  pg.  298.  t  Luecke,  pg.  299. 


SECOND  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN. 


1.  The  elder  unto  the  elect  lady  and  her  children,  whom 
I  love  in  the  truth ;  mid  not  I  only,  but  also  all  they  that 
have  known  the  truth  ; 

2.  For  the  truth's  sake,  which  dwelleth  in  u?,  and  shall  be 
with  us  for  ever. 

3.  Grace  be  with  you,  mercy,  and  peace,  from  God  the 
Father,  and  from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  Fa- 
ther, in  truth  and  love. 

As  said  In  the  introduction,  I  take  the  word  translated  "lady" 
to  be  a  proper  and  not  a  common  noun — the  personal  name  of 

this  Christian  sister,  Cyria. "Elect"  in  the  Christian  sense — 

one  of  God's  chosen,  beloved.  The  same  word  is  used  of  her  sis- 
ter (v.  13),  some  of  whose  children  were  then  with  the  apostle. 

"Love  in  the  irutli" — might  in  some  connections  be  taken  ad- 
verbially in  the  sense  of  truly.  But  here  the  emphatic  repeti- 
tion of  the  word  "truth" — "all  who  have  known  the  truth;" 
"  for  the  truth's  sake;"  and  at  the  close  of  the  salutation — "hi 
truth  and  love,"  and  in  v.  4,  "walking  in  the  truth" — strongly 
support  another  construction — substa.ntially  of  this  sort; — love  in 
the  interests   of  truth;    in  the  fellowship  of  the  truth;  for  the 

truth's  sake. Throughout  John's  writing  we  are  impressed  by 

the  prominence  given  to  love — love  to  Christ,  love  to  the  Father, 
love  to  the  brethren.  How  wonderfully  does  this  sentiment  live 
and  glow  in  his  soul  and  this  word  distill  in  fragrance  from  his 
lips !  But  here  we  see  a  like  prominence  given  to  truth.  Cer- 
tainly in  his  thought  "  truth  is  in  order  to  goodness  " — a  necessary 
means  to  that  end ;  at  the  very  foundation  of  all  intelligent  love. 
The  love  he  thinks  of  is  not  sentimentalism ;  is  not  a  mere  emo- 
tional good  nature ;  but  is  an  intelligent  benevolence,  which  seeks 
for  all  men  the  good  that  is  seen  to  be  the  highest  and  best  possi- 
ble ;  which  intelligently  sees  a  perfect  God  at  the  head  of  the 
universe,  and  giving  him  the  supreme  love  of  the  heart,  loves  all 
his  creatures  for  his  sake,  following  his  high  example,  obeying 
(3GC) 


II.  JOHN.  367 

his  pevlcct  will.  Thus  love  in  creatures,  being  at  once  intelligent 
and  moral,  rests  on  the  basis  of  truih.  What  we  know  and  be- 
lieve of  the  Infinite  God — Father,  Son  and  Spirit — inspires  and 
directs  all  rational  love  of  man  to  man;  and  pre-eminently  of 
Christian  man  to  his  fellow-Christians. — —John  wrote  this  epistle 
under  a  quickened  sense  of  the  priceless  value  of  Christian  truth, 
this  sense  being  wrought  into  intense  feeling  by  the  dangerous 
influence  of  men  who  were  undermining  the  foundations  of  the 
gospel  system.  Yvliat  would  become  of  love  if  men  were  to  deny 
that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh  ?  What  can  that  love  be 
good  for  which  knows  no  Jesus — which  has  dishonored  his  name — 
which  has  stricken  down  all  the  moral  forces  toward  pure  be- 
nevolence, which  have  come  to  us  in  the  revelation  of  God's  great 
love  to  lost  men  in  giving  his  only  Son  ?  When  the  vital  truths 
of  the  gospel,  and  indeed  of  all  revealed  religion,  are  thus  slaugh- 
tered, what  can  be  left  us?  What  are  men's  professions  of  love 
worth  after  they  have  stricken  down  and  blotted  out  all  the  great 
love-inspiring  truths  of  Christianity  ? 

4.  I  rejoiced  greatly  that  I  found  of  thy  children  walking 
in  truth,  a.s  we  have  received  a  commandment  from  the 
Father. 

5.  And  now  I  beseech  thee,  lady,  not  as  though  I  wrote  a 
new  commandment  unto  thee,  but  tliat  which  we  had  from 
the  beginning,  that  we  love  one  another. 

6.  And  this  is  love,  that  we  walk  after  his  commandments. 
This  is  the  commandment.  That,  as  ye  have  heaixl  from  the 
beginning,  ye  should  Avalk  in  it. 

This  Christian  sister  had  children.  John  had  learned  that 
they  were  walking  in  truth  according  to  the  Father's  command- 
ment, and  rejoiced  in  this  exceedingly.  Such  a  mother  does  a  glori- 
ous service  for  God,  for  the  church,  for  mankind.  We  may  notice 
that  John  has  not  fallen  in  with  the  notions  sadly  prevalent  in 
the  early  church,  of  a  superior  sanctity  in  celibacy,  virginity,  and 
the  monastic  life.  He  believes  in  virtuous  mothers  and  in  truth- 
loving,  truth-abiding  children. We  notice  the  same  staple  Chris- 
tian graces  put  forward  here  as  in  John's  gospel  and  first  epistle  : — 
Christian  love  of  the  brethren,  and  obeying  God's  command- 
ments— the  essence,  proof,  and  manifestation  of  true  love. 

7.  For  many  deceivers  are  entered  into  the  world,  who 
confess  not  that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh.  This  is  a 
deceiver  and  an  antichrist. 

8.  Look  to  yourselves,  that  we  lose  not  those  things  which 
we  have  wrought,  but  that  we  receive  a  full  reward. 

9.  Whosoever  transgresseth,  and  abideth  not  in  the  doc- 
trine of  Christ,  hath  not  God.  He  that  abideth  in  the  doc- 
trine of  Christ,  he  hath  both  the  Father  and  the  Son. 


368  II.  JOHN. 

The  truth  of  God  was  vigorously  assailed ;  false  prophets  and 
teachers  were  abroad  in  force.  Their  doctrines  are  sufiiciently 
defined;  they  denied  the  real  incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God. 
"Whether  so  intended  by  themselves  or  not,  this  was  equivalent  to 
renouncing  the  whole  gospel  scheme.     There  was  no  Jesus,  no 

Savior  for  lost  men  if  Christ  had  not  come  in  the  flesh. These 

deceivers  did  not  hold  but  rejected  the  true  doctrine  of  Christ 
(v.  9).  Of  course  there  was  no  God  of  truth  left  to  their  system, 
for  they  had  made  the  true  God  a  liar  by  not  believing  his  testi- 
mony as  to  his  Son.  Take  care  now  (John  would  say)  lest,  se- 
duced into  these  fixtal  errors  of  doctrine,  ye  lose  all  that  ye  have 
wrought  through  years  of  gospel  labor,  and  fail  utterly  of  any 
reward. 

10.  If  there  come  any  unto  you,  and  bring  not  this  doc- 
trine, receive  him  not  into  your  house,  neither  bid  him  God 
speed : 

11.  For  he  that  biddeth  him  God  speed  is  partaker  of  his 
evil  deeds. 

John  understood  that  Oriental  rights  of  hospitality  were  held 
most  dear — not  to  say  sacred ;  that  it  would  be  a  hard  thing — ■ 
a  stern  test  of  principle,  to  turn  from  your  door  any  well-appear- 
ing stranger  who  might  present  himself  as  your  friend ;  but  John 
is  inflexible ;  the  bottom  truths  of  the  gospel  are  more  to  him 
than  the  demands  of  hospitality.  Therefore,  he  enjoins — If  any 
man  come  to  your  door,  seeking  admittance  to  your  hospitality, 
and  begging  your  good  offices  in  his  behalf,  yet  if  he  bring  not 
this  true  doctrine  of  Christ  but  discard  it — receive  him  not  into 
your  house ;  give  him  not  even  the  common  friendly  salutation 
(God  speed  and  bless  you),  for  to  do  even  this  is  to  make  your- 
self responsible  for  his  mischief — is  to  assume  a  share  with  him 
in  all  the  evil  he  may  do.  For  this  some  may  disown  you ;  but 
I  implore  you  be  true  to  Christ  and  to  the  cause  of  heavenly 
truth,  however  much  this  firmness  may  displease  men  who  have 
no  gospel  truth  in  their  souls,  or  however  it  may  seem  to  dishonor 
the  claims  of  hospitality. 

12.  Having  many  things  to  write  unto  you,  I  would  not 
torite  with  paper  and  ink:  but  I  trust  to  come  unto  you, 
and  speak  face  to  face,  that  our  joy  may  be  full. 

13.  The  children  of  thy  elect  sister  greet  thee.     Amen. 

I  have  much  to  say — more  than  I  can  write ;  but  these  things 

are  too  vital  to  be  postponed ; — so  much  must  be  said. The 

burden  then  pressing  on  the  heart  of  this  noble  patriarch  is  lifted 
when  he  has  admonished  this  sister,  tenderly,  solemnly,  to  stand 
firm  against  those  deceivers  and  antichrists  who  were  discarding 
the  true  faith  of  Christ. 


THIEI)  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN. 


1.  The  elder  unto  the  well  beloved  Gain?,  Avhoni  I  love 
iu  the  truth. 

2.  Beloved,  I  "wish  above  all  things  that  thou  niayest 
prosper  and  be  in  health,  even  as  thy  soul  prosj)ereth. 

"  Love  in  the  ti-uth,"  as  in  2  John  1 — love  in  the  common 
bonds  of  the  gospel  of  truth,  in  behalf  of  the  truth  and  in    its 

precious  sympathies. Frail  of  body,  but  strong  and  noble  of 

soul,  Gains  was  a  rare  man.  The  men  are  few  in  our  world  for 
Avhom  this  chief  prayer  of  John  for  Gains  would  be  appropriate 
— that  their  body  might  be  as  vigorous  as  their  souls  are  healthy, 
thriving  and  strong.  In  the  case  of  most  men  this  prayer  needs 
to  be  reversed,  and  put  thus : — I  wish  above  all  things  that  thy 
soul  may  thrive  in  piety  as  thy  body  does  in  its  healthful  vigor. 

3.  For  I  rejoiced  greatly,  when  the  brethren  came  and 
testified  of  the  truth  that  is  iu  thee,  even  as  thou  walkest  in 
the  truth, 

4.  I  have  no  greater  joy  than  to  hear  that  my  children 
walk  in  truth. 

Gains  seems  to  have  been  one  of  John's  spiritual  children. 
Full  of  love  for  Jesus  and  his  truth  as  John's  heart  was,  it  should 
not  surprise  us  to  hear  him  say — "  I  have  no  greater  joy  than  to 

hear  that  my  children  walk  in  the  truth." To  walk  in   the 

truth  is  to  put  gospel  truth  to  its  proper  use  by  making  it  govern 
all  the  commonest  deeds  of  life,  even  all  human  activities — by 
fundamentally  controlling  the  whole  heart,  i.  e.  the  will.  A 
blessed  earthly  life  is  this  which  is  shaped  evermore  by  the  be- 
hests of  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus. 

5.  Beloved,  thou  doest  faithfur.y  whatsoever  thou  doest  to 
the  brethren,  and  to  strangers; 

6.  Which  have  borne  witness  of  thy  charity  before  the 

(369) 


370  III.  JOHN. 

church :  -whom  if  thou  bring  forward  on  their  journey  after 
a  godly  sort,  thou  shalt  do  well: 

7.  Because  that  for  his  name's  sake  they  went  forth,  tak- 
ing nothing  of  the  Gentiles. 

8.  We  therefore  ought  to  receive  such,  that  we  might  be 
fellow  helpers  to  the  truth. 

Testifying  warmly  to  the  nohle  hospitality  and  hearty  good  will 
of  Gains  to  his  Christian  brethren  and  even  to  those  who  were 
personally  strangers,  John  now  commends  to  his  confidence  and 
aid  certain  missionary  brethren  going  forth  for  the  work  of 
Christ,  and  in  so  for  at  their  own  charge  that  they  "  took  noth- 
ing of  the  Gentiles."  To  help  such  men  was  to  be  fellow-helpers 
to  the  truth — a  consideration  which   such  a  man   as  Gaius  would 

surely  appreciate. In  v.  6  our  translators  have   expressed  the 

Greek  word  which  every  where  means  love  by  the  word  "  char- 
it}'."  Neither  they  nor  we  should  restrict  the  sense  to  almsgiv- 
ing. It  is  here  rather  that  full-souled  love  which  may  indeed  de- 
velop itself  in  giving  alms,  yet  not  in  this  way  only,  jjut  in  every 
other  way  possible. 

9.  I  wrote  unto  the  church:  but  Diotrephes,  who  lovetli 
to  have  the  pre-eminence  among  them,  receiveth  us  not. 

10.  Wherefore,  if  I  come,  I  wdll  remember  his  deeds 
which  he  doeth,  prating  against  us  with  malicious  words  : 
and  not  content  therewith,  neither  doth  he  himself  receive  the 
brethren,  and  forbiddeth  them  that  would,  and  castcth  them 
out  of  the  church. 

Even  the  venerable  John  encountered  opposition  in  his  own 
churches.  The  spirit  of  this  opponent  John  puts  in  one  Greek 
word  Avhich  it  may  be  hard  to  match  perfectly  in  onr  tongue ; 
yet  we  might  call  him  a  potver-loving  man,  whose  master  passion 
was  to  he  first  every-where.  Consequently  he  must  needs  op- 
pose whatever  counter-worked  his  ruling  passion.  This  Diotre- 
phes would  not  receive  those  whom  John  commended  to  the 
church  by  letter.  They  not  being  his  men,  nor  working  under 
his  control,  he  was  bound  to  oppose.  Worse  still,  he  slandered 
the  aged  apostle;  would  neither  receive  the  brethren  he  sent  nor 
let  the  church  receive  them,  and  seems  to  have  had  power 
enough  to  expel  them.  John  writes  : — "  If  I  should  come,  I  will 
remember  his  deeds" — said  apparently  with  reference  to  some 
infliction  of  physical  evil — judgment  from  God — a  form  of  mira- 
culous power  which  seems  to  have  been  lodged  in  the  hands  of 
the  apostles  to  meet  cases  of  this  sort. 

11.  Beloved,  follow  not  that  which  is  evil,  but  that  which 
is  good.  He  that  doeth  good  is  of  God  :  but  he  that  doeth 
evil  hath  not  seen  God. 


III.  JOHN.  .  371 

This  is  the  genenvl  rule  or  law  for  the  Christian  life,  resting 
on  eternal  foundations.  Doing  good  is  godlike ;  the  doer  of  evil 
has  not  known  God.  There  is  nothing  godlike  in  his  work;  no 
influence  from  God  has  moved  him  that  way.  It  is  worse  than 
vain  for  him  to  pretend  (as  Diotrcphes  had  doubtless  done)  that 
he  Avas  serving  God. 

12.  Demetrius  hath  good  report  of  all  men,  and  of  the 
truth  itself:  yea,  and  we  also  bear  record ;  and  ye  know  that 
our  record  is  true. 

Why  Demetrius  is  spoken  of  hero  does  not  appear  clearly. 
Probably  he  had  had  trouble  with  Diotrephes ;  perhaps  had  been 
expelled  from  the  church  by  his  means.  If  so,  this  would  ac- 
count for  John's  indorsing  his  character  so  decidedly. 

13.  I  had  many  things  to  write,  but  I  will  not  with  ink 
and  pen  write  unto  thee  : 

14.  But  I  trust  I  shall  shortly  see  thee,  and  we  shall  speak 
face  to  face.  Peace  be  to  thee.  Oiw  friends  salute  thee. 
Greet  the  friends  by  name. 

The  full  heart  of  the  aged  apostle  finds  but  meager  and  tame 
expression  through  ink  and  pen.  lie  hopes  to  see  this  dear 
brother  soon,  and  therefore  closes  here  with  heartiest  Christian 
salutations. 

Dear  old  man!  It  may  have  been  a  slow  and  painful  labor  for 
that  trembling  hand  of  thine  to  put  on  paper  so  many  blessed 
words  as  have  come  to  us  in  thy  gospel  history  and  in  these  three 
letters.  We  thank  thee  for  them  all !  A  heavenly  fragrance 
breathes  forth  through  them  from  thy  warm,  loving  heart.  Pre- 
cious witnesses  for  the  true  doctrine  of  Jesus  are  they,  which  the 
Christian  Avorld  could  never  afford  to  spare.  Most  and  best  of  all 
— they  give  us  the  words,  the  spirit,  the  life  and  the  love  of  Jesus 
Christ  as  manifest  in  the  flesh,  making  it  seem  to  the  thoughtful 
readers  thereof  all  along  the  ages  that  they  have  been  introduced 
and  made  personally  acquainted  with  Jesus  himself.  Such  writ- 
ten words  are  a  precious  legacy,  a  heavenly  benediction  to  nian- 
kind. 


EXOUESUS  L 


O71  the  Divlnltij  of  Christ  as  related  to  the  Truiitij  and   Unity 
of  God. 

The  very  opening  of  John's  gospel  springs  this  great  question 
upon  us.  The  term  Logos  ["Word"],  beyond  all  controversy, 
designates  that  pre-existent  Personage  who  became  incarnate  in 
the  human  Jesus.  John  affirms  of  this  Logos  these  several  facts: 
That  he  existed  from  eternity;  that  in  that  eternal  state  he  existed 
ivith  God ;  and  that  he  ivas  God.  Also  that  all  things  "were  made 
by  him,  and  yet,  that  this  truly  divine  Personage  "  became  ^csA," 
/.  e.  in  the  sense  of  entering  into  mysterious  union  with  man ; 
and  so  "dwelt  among  us,"  revealing  the  glory  of  the  only-begot- 
ten Son  of  God. 

In  the  outset  let  it  be  premised  that  T  use  the  terms  person  or 
personage  to  avoid  circumlocution,  and  moreover  as  being  the 
nearest  approximation  to  the  true  idea,  yet  not  thereby  implying 
that  absolute  and  perfect  distinction  which  the  term  indicates 
Avhen  used  of  men  as  related  to  each  other.^ 

"-■•The  question  often  arises — Inasmuch  as  the  word  "  person"  is  ad- 
mitted to  be  defective  and  sometimes  misleading,  why  not  use  some 
better  word?  Why  not  get  a  perfectly  descriptive  term — one  which 
will  give  the  exact  sense  with  no  liability  to  misapprehension? 

The  answer  is— No  human  language  can  furnish  such  a  word. 
This  impossibility  rests  mainly  on  the  fact  that  neither  our  own  hu- 
man nature  nor  any  other  created  nature  fully  known  to  us  fur- 
nishes any   analogy  to  this  triune  relationship.     Therefore  human 

speech  furnishes  no  word  to  express  it,  or  the  parties  to  it. All 

human  language  is  of  necessity  built  on  known  human  relations,  ex- 
periences, knowledges;  and  therefore  supplies  us  with  no  words  for 
things  that  have  no  human  analogy. 

I  have  said — "  rests  mainly"  on  the  absence  of  analogy  in  human 
nature.  Let  me  add  that  immense  difficulties  embarrass  all  our  at- 
tempts to  define  this  triune  relationship  by  any  circumlocutions  of 
speech,  because  the  light  from  revelation  on  this  point  comes  in  the 
form  of  statements  Avhich  assume  and  im2dy  rather  than  define  and 
«^?-m  metaphysically  what  it  is.  For  example:  "The  glory  which 
I  had  with  thee  befoi-e  the  world  was"  (John  17;  5)  assumes  and 
implies  some  distinction  between  "I"  and  "thee,"  but  does  not  define 
it  metaphysically. 
(372) 


DIVlNIXr  OF  CHRIST  AND  TRLNm'  OF  GOD.         C73 

A  certain  undefined  distinction,  expressed  by  this  qualified 
use  of  the  word  "  person"  exists  between  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit. 
As  we  shall  see  in  the  progress  of  the  discussion,  each  is  mani- 
festly represented  as  being  truly  divine,  and  yet  as  in  some  sense 
distinct  from  the  others. 

How  can  these  fiicts  be  reconciled  with  the  unity  of  God? 
How,  on  any  laws  of  being  known  to  us,  can  the  Logos  be  him- 
self God  and  be  also  "  lolth  (iod"  as  John  most  clearly  affirms, 
and  yet  there  be  but  one  God?  How  shall  the  Bible  doctrine  of 
the  Trinity  of  persons  in  the  Godhead  be  adjusted  to  the  Bible 
doctrine  of  the  unity  of  God  ? 

It  is  vital  to  any  practical  good  from  tliis  investigation  that  we 
hold  firmly  in  mind  that  it  is  the  Bible  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
and  nothing  else  or  other  than  this,  that  we  have  occasion  to  ex- 
plain and  defend.  If  we  are  to  have  any  theory  at  all  as  to  this 
triune  distinction  of  persons,  we  need  one  which  will  apply  to  the 
language  of  the  Scriptures — to  the  modes  of  expression  fOund  in 
them  touching  the  relations  of  the  Father  to  the  Son  and  of  the 
Son  to  the  Father,  and  of  either  or  both  to  the  Spirit.  For  we 
can  know  nothing  of  Christ's  real  divinity  save  from  the  Scrip- 
tures; or,  more  comprehensively  stated,  we  can  know  nothing  of 
a  Trinity  of  any  sort  in  the  Godhead  except  what  comes  to  us  in 
this  written  revelation.  It  is  thei'efore  most  appropriate  to  begin 
Avith  the  inquirj'-:  Hoiv  do  the  Scriptures  present  tliis  snbjecl'? 
What  words  and  statements  do  Ave  find  here  which  seem  to  assume 
and  imply  that  special  distinction  in  the  Godhead  which  we  indi- 
cate by  the  term  "  person"  ? 

Let  us  then  group  together  at  least  the  more  important  passages 
which  involve  this  distinction. 

Obviously  Ave  should  omit  from  this  group  all  those  passages  in 
Avhich  the  human  nature  of  Jesus  is  made  prominent.  For, 
plainly,  it  might  be  suppposed  that  a  divine  effluence,  analogous 
to  that  of  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  all  Christians,  might  have  dwelt 
in  the  man  Jesus,  and  yet  this  indAvelling  of  the  Spirit  AA'Ould  fall 
entirely  short  of  implying  real  divinity.  It  Avould  im'olve  noth- 
ing like  distinct  personality  in  the  being  of  God. 

Foremost  in  our  group  of  test  passages  we  may  fitly  place  the 
opening  verses  of  John's  gospel — already  brought  before  the 
reader.  The  Logos — the  same  who  Avas  made  flesh  by  a  human 
birth  of  the  virgin  IMary — existed  from  eternity ;  is  declared  to 
haA'ebeen  tvith  God;  and  to  be  really  God.  Of  this  last  named 
point,  the  highest  sort  of  proof  is  given  in  the  fact  that  "  all  things 
Avere  made  by  him  "  as  the  absolute  and  universal  Creator. 

Again:  "The  Father  loveth  the  Son,  and  hath  giA-en  all  things 
into  his  hand  "  (John  3  :  35).  This  "giving  of  all  things  into  his 
hand  "  is  nothing  less  than  the  investiture  Avith  supreme  domin- 
ion (See  Matt.  28  :  18),  such  as  no  merely  human  being  could 

hold  and  Avield ;  such  as  must  imply  attributes  perfectly  divine. 

Let  it  be   noted  here  that  this  gift  of  all  poAver  made  by   the 
Father  to  the  Son  involves  the  very  distinction  Avhich  Ave  call  per- 


374        DIVINITY  OF  CHRIST  AND  TRINITY  OF  GOD. 

sonal.  For  the  meaning  can  not  be  that  the  Father  gives  all 
things  into  his  own  hands;  but  rather  that  he  gives  them  to 
another  than  himself— even  to  the  8on.  So  also  the  love  of  the 
Father  for  the  Son — apparently  put  here  as  a  reason  for  invest- 
ing him  Avitli  supreme  dominion — involves  some  sort  of  distinc- 
tion of  person.  Such  language  is  often  used  of  human  fathers 
giving  property  or  dominion  to  their  sons — a  fact  which  must  be 
held  to  interpret  these  inspired  words. 

Analogous  to  this  is  the  passage  (John  5 :  22,  23) :  "  The  Father 
hath  committed  all  judgment  unto  the  Son" — a  responsibility 
which  requires  divine  attributes  and  a  conveyance  of  prerogative 
which  assumes  distinct  personality — both  points  being  made  the 
stronger  by  the  declared  purpose  or  object  in  view;  viz.  "  that  all 
should  honor  the  Son  even  as  they  honor  the  Father,  lie  that 
lionoreth  not  the  Son,  honoreth  not  the  Father  Avho    hath   sent 

him." Also  John  7:   02:   "What   if  ye  see  the  Son  of  man 

ascend  up  where  he  was  before?" — in  which  words  the  speaker 
thinks  of  himself  as  being  in  heaven  before  his  manifestation  in 
human  flesh,  his  ruling  consciousness  being  that  of  his  divine  na- 
ture. The  same  ruling  consciousness — the  divine  eclipsing  the 
human — appears  often  in  the  Avords  of  Christ;  c.  g.  John  17  :  5: 
"  The  glory  which  I  had  with  thee  before  the  world  was;"  the  ego 
[I]  being  none  other  than  the  pre-existent  divine  Personage — un- 
questionably thought  of  as  distinct  from  the  Father — "  which  1 

had  with  Thee." See  also  John  17:  24:  "For  thou  lovedst  mo 

before  the  foundation  of  the  world." Also  John  8:  58:  To  the 

question  put  by  the  Jews;  "Hast  thou — being  not  yet  fifty  years 
old — seen  Abraham?"  Jesus  answered;  "Before  Abraham  was,  1 
am  " — "  am  "  in  the  sense  which  assumes  perpetual  and  change- 
less existence,  being  borrowed  apparently  from  the  passage  in 

Moses  (Ex.  3:  14):  "I  am  hath  sent  me,"  etc. Here  also  the 

"I"  must  contemplate  his  pre-existent  personality. 

Note  also  the  numerous  passages  in  which  Christ  claims  to 
have  seen  and  known  the  Father  {e.  g.  John  6 :  46,  and  1:18,  and 
Matt.  11 :  27) ;  also  to  be  the  only  Personage  capable  of  revealing 
the  Father,  and  moreover,  really  revealing  him :  "  No  man  hath 
seen  God  at  any  time;  the  only  begotten  Son  who  is  in  the  bosom 
of  the  Father,  he  hath  declared  him"  (1:  18).  Also  this  state- 
ment;— "I  came  forth  from  the  Father,  and  am  come  into  the 
Avorld:  again,  I  leave  the  world  and  go  to  the  Father"  (John 
16:  28).  In  the  first  clause  here  the  divine  is  the  ruling  con- 
sciousness; in  speaking  thus  of  himself,  his  thought  is  upon  the 
divine  in  his  nature  rather  than  the  human.  He  speaks  not  as 
man  but  as  God;  yet  certainly  of  himself  as  God,  not  in  any  such 
sense  as  would  comprehend  the  whole  of  God  and  ignore  all  dis- 
tinction of  Father  from  Son. 

Note  also  how  the  Son  classes  himself  with  the  Father  (as  in 
John  14:  23):  "If  a  man  love  me  he  will  keep  my  woi'ds ;  and 
my  Father  will  love  him,  and  ive  tcill  come  unto  him  and  make 
our  abode  with  him  " — language  which  assumes  virtual  equality 


DIVINITY  OF  CHRIST  AND  TRINITY  OF  GOD.        37o 

Avith  Goil,  and  ^Yllich  also  involves  some  sort  of  real  distinction  of 
personality. 

A  similar  implication  appears  in  the  different  methods  in  ■which 
Christ  promises  the  gift  of  the  Spirit:  "I  will  pray  the  Father 
and  Ac  will  give  you  another  Comforter"  (John  14:  16);  compared 
■with  this:  "When  the  Comforter  is  come  whom  /will  send  unto 
you  from  the  Father"  (John  15:  2G).  Here  the  agents — "I," 
"  he  "  or  "  the  Father,"  appear  as  distinct  persons,  yet  each  as 
really  divine;  each  interchangeably  thought  of  as  doing  the  same 
thing,  and  therefore  as  really  exercising  divine  prerogatives. 

In  John's   first   epistle   we   have   similar  expressions :    "  That 
which  Avas  from  the  beginning     .     .     .     which  we  have  looked 
upon  and  our  hands  have  handled  of  the  Woi'd  of  life"; 
"  We  show  unto  you  the  Eternal  Life  who  was  with  the  Father, 

and  Avas  manifested  tons,"  etc.  (1  John  1:  1,2). Also  this:  "We 

are  in  him  that  is  true,  even  in  his  Son  Jesus  Christ.     This  is 
the  true  God  and  eternal  life"  (1  John  5:  20). 

Turning  from  John  to  Paul,  1  adduce  first  a  passage  in  which 
the  Christian  doctrine  is  put  in  contrast  with  heathen  polytheism 
(1  Cor.  8:  4-6):  "We  know  that  an  idol  is  nothing  in  the  world, 
and  that  there  is  no  other  God  but  one.  For  though  there  be 
that  are  called  gods,  whether  in  heaven  or  in  earth  (as  there  be 
gods  many  and  lords  many)  ;  But  unto  us  there  is  but  one  God,  the 
Father,  of  whom  are  all  things  and  we  in  him ;  and  one  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  by  whom  are  all  things,  and  we  by  him."  Here  a  broad 
line  of  distinction  is  drawn  between  the  Father  and  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ;  yet  not  such  a  distinction  in  Paul's  view  as  pre- 
cluded him  from  affirming  that  while  heathen  idolaters  have 
"  gods  many,"  Christians  have  but  one  God.  The  relation  of  all 
things  that  exist,  to  the  Father  on  the  one  hand,  and  to  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  on  the  other — expressed  here  by  "of"  (f|)  as  to  the 
Father,  and  by  the  preposition  "by"  (dia)  as  to  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  suggests  the  Father  as  the  infinite  original  Source  of  all 
created  being,  and  the  Son  as  mediately  the  Agent  by  Avhom  this 
creation  is  Avrought.  Yet  this  mediate  agency  must  involve  the 
attributes  of  real  divinity.  Paul  does  not  tell  us  how  he  harmo- 
nizes the  doctrine  of  but  one  God  Avith  this  manifestly  distinct 
personality  of  the  Father  from  the  Loi-d  Jesus  Christ,  coupled 
Avith  the  actual  creatorship  of  the  latter,  carrying  Avith  it,  as  it 
must,  his  real  and  true  divinity. 

Let  us  also  note  some  passages  in  which  Paul  seems  to  indi- 
cate his  conception  of  a  Trinity  in  God  (e.  g.  1.  Cor.  12:  4-6): 
"Now  there  are  diversities  of  gifts  but  the  same  Spirit;  and 
there  are  diflferences  of  administration  but  the  same  Lord;  and 
there  are  diversities  of  operations  but  it  is  the  same  God  who 
Avorketh  all  in  all."  Here  "the  Spirit,"  "the  Lord,"  and  "God" 
are  each  thought  of  as  doing  essentially  the  same  thing ;  prose- 
cuting the  same  Avork;  each  and  all  conveying  spiritual  gifts  to 

the  people  of  God. Most  fully  in   hai-mony  with   this  is   his 

form  of  Avhat  is  known  as  "the  Apostolic  benediction"  (2  Cor. 


376        DIVINITY  OF  CHRIST  AND  TRINITY  OF  GOD. 

13:  14):  "The  grace  of  the  Loi-d  Jesus  Christ  and  the  love  of 
God  and  the  communion  of  the  Holy  Ghost  be  Avith  you  all." 
The  reader  will  have  a  sufficient  comment  on  this  passage  if  he 
■will  suppose  another  of  Paul's  epistles  to  close  thus:  "The 
grace  of  the  one  (iod,  and  the  good  will  of  the  angel  Gabriel, 
and  the  blessing  of  the  Holy.  Virgin  (or  of  the  great  Apostle  Peter) 
be  with  you  all." 

It  deserves  remark  that  the  doctrine  of  distinct  personality  in 
the  Godhead,  coupled  with  the  true  divinity  of  the  Son,  is  not 
liascd  on  certain  isolated  passages,  wrested  out  of  their  connec- 
tion and  so  misinterpreted.  For  in  some  instances  the  doctrine 
is  found  wa'ought  into  the  entire  scope  of  the  context,  and  elab- 
orately argued  as  the  very  point  to  be  proved.  See  for  example 
the  entire  first  chapter  to  the  Hebrews  :  "  God  .  .  .  hath  in  these 
last  days  spoken  unto  us  by  his  Son,  whom  he  hath  appointed  heir 
of  all  things;  by  whom  also  he  made  the  worlds;  who  being  the 
brightness  of  his  glory,  and  the  express  image  of  his  person,  and 
upholding  all  things  by  the  word  of  his  power,  when  he  had  by 
himself  purged  our  sins,  sat  down  on  the  right  hand  of  the  ]\[a- 
jesty  on  high ;  "  all  Avhich  involves  distinct  personality  and  also 
real  divinity.  Then  the  writer  places  this  exalted  Son  in  contrast 
Avith  the  angels,  and  labors  to  prove  not  only  that  he  is  greater 
than  they,  but  that  he  is  really  divine  and  they  are  not;  tliat  he 
is  called  God  (vs.  8,  9)  as  they  are  not;  that  he  laid  the  founda- 
tions of  the  earth — a  work  never  done  by  them  ;  and  that  angels 
are  required  to  Avorship  the  Son,  obviously  with  such  worship  as 
is  appropriate  to  no  being  lower  than  God. 

This  group  of  passages  (and  such  as  these)  present  the  condi- 
tions that  must  be  met  by  any  theory  proposed  for  the  purpose 
of  harmonizing  distinct  personality  as  between  the  Father,  the 
Logos,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  with  the  doctrine  of  one  God  only. 

Let  it  now  be  carefully  observed : 

(1)  That  this  personality  is  put,  not  in  modified,  qualified 
tei-ms,  as  if  the  speakers  were  consciously  using  language  in  some 
other  than  its  ordinary  sense  ;  but  in  plain,  unqualified  phrase — 
such  as,  if  used,  of  A^arious  men,  would  by  no  means  suggest  any 
thing  less  than  entirely  distinct  persons. 

(2)  That  these  persons  are  represented  as  performing  distinct 
works,  exercising  diverse  functions  and  each  his  OAA'n — functions 
moreover  that  are  truly  di\'ine;  e.  g.  the  Father  usually  as  origi- 
nating the  great  scheme  of  redemption — ("  God  so  loved  the 
Avorld  that  he  sent  his  Son,"  etc.;  "  We  have  one  God  of  whom 
are  all  things,"  etc.);  the  Son  as  creating  all  things;  becoming 
heir  of  all  things ;  as  being  the  universal  Lord  and  final  Judge  ; 
and  the  Holy  Ghost  as  a   spiritual ,  force,  wielding  a  power  of 

truth  for  moral  regeneration   in  human   souls. [As   bearing 

upon  the  precise  question  noAV  before  us,  it  is  not  pertinent  to  in- 
troduce the  special  functions  of  the  Son  considered  as  incarnate. 
His  human  nature,  his  sufferings  unto  death,  the  atonement  thus 


DIVINITY  OF  CIIIIIST  AND  TRINITY  OF  GOD.         377 

made — all  that  rests  upon  the  incarnation  proper — should  logic- 
ally be  omitted.] 

(3)  These  persons  are  represented  as  having  a  distinct  moral 
character — to  such  an  extent  distinct  as  to  become  objects  of 
mutual  love  to  each  other;  e.  g.  "For  thou  lovedst  me  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world"  (John  17:  24).  In  this  passage,  the 
"  me  "  can  be  no  other  than  the  Logos,  for  "  before  the  world 
was,"  the  incarnation  had  not  taken  place.  There  was  no  human 
nature  included  under  "me,"  but  only  the  divine. Either  lov- 
ing or  being  loved  involves  the  possession  of  all  the  grand  elements 
of  a  moranjeing.  Moreover  it  can  scarcely  be  necessary  to  sug- 
gest that  the  words — "Thou  lovedst  me" — express  distinct  per- 
sonality in  terms  most  clear  and  decisive.  Who  can  express  per- 
sonality in  stronger  and  less  ambiguous  phrase  ? 

Now  obviously,  any  theory  proposed  for  the  purpose  of  har- 
monizing these  scriptural  representations  with  the  unity  of  God 
must  meet  these  conditions ;  otherwise  it  is  valueless. 

At  this  point,  and  before  we  proceed  to  name  and  discuss  the 
various  theories  which  look  toward  this  harmony,  it  seems  im- 
poi'tant  to  bring  under  brief  review  a  sample  at  least  of  the  pas- 
sages which  teach  or  imply  the  unity  of  God.  It  behooves  us  to 
inquire  how  this  unity  is  affirmed;  to  what  extent  it  is  put  in  con- 
trast with  polytheism,  and  how  far  (if  at  all)  it  may  seem  to  be 
affirmed  in  such  connections  and  relations  as  bear  upon  [or  if  it 
be  so  against^  distinct  and  equal  personality. 

Passages  from  the  Old  Testament  come  first  in  order  ;  e.  g. 
Deut.  4 -^  35,  39,  and  6  :  4,  5,  14.  "  The  Lord,  he  is  God;  there  is 
none  else  beside  him,"  etc.  "  Hear,  O  Israel,  the  Lord  our  God 
is  one  Lord,"  etc.  "  Ye  shall  not  go  after  other  cods,"  etc. 
Compare  also  Isa.  44:  8,  and  42  :  8,  and  Ps.  86  :  8,  10,'and  89  :  6, 

and  Jer.  10 :  6. It   is  the  less  important  to  cite  and  expound 

these  passages,  inasmuch  as  they  do  not  appear  to  bear  purposely 
against  or  even  upon  the  tripersonality  of  God ;  but  are  leveled 
against  the  giant  delusion  of  the  ages — viz.  polytheism — the  in- 
definite multiplication  of  gods,  in  diversified  grades,  in  various 
spheres  of  activity,  of  countless  nationalities  and  basest  morals. 

Turning  to  the  prominent  New  Testament  passages,  note  first 
John  17  :  3  :   "This  is  life  eternal,  that  they  may  know  Thee,  the 

only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  thou  hast  sent." The 

noticeable  thing  in  this  passage,  and  in  the  prayer  of  which  it 
forms  a  part,  is  that  while  it  seems  to  affirm  the  absolute  unity 
of  God  in  most  explicit  terms,  it  yet  equally  seems  to  imply  and 
therefore  to  hold  the  true  divinity  of  the  Logos,  and  also  his  dis- 
tinct personality.  For  the  knowledge  of  Jesus  Christ  as  that  in 
which  eternal  life  consists  is  put  on  the  same  footing  with  the 
knowledge  of  "Thee,  the  only  true  God."  We  find  also  among 
the  words  of  this  prayer,  these :  "  The  glory  which  I  had  with 
thee  before  the  world  was"  (v.  5);  "  They  have  known  surely 
that  I  came  forth  from  Thee  "  (v.  8)  ;  "  Thou  lovedst  me  before 
the  foundation  of  the  world"   (v.  24);    "The   world    hath  not 


378  DIVINITY  OF  CHRIST  AND  TRINITY  OF  GOD. 

known  Thee,  but  I  have  known  Thee  "  (v.  25) ;  "I  have  declared 
unto  them  thy  name,"  etc.  (v.  26).  In  the  same  prayer,  thei-e- 
fore,  Christ  seems  to  aiBrm  the  unity  (shall  we  snj  absolute  unity) 
of  God,  and  also  to  imply  for  himself  an  eternal  pre-existence; 
the  coming  forth  from  God  into  the  world;  the  being  loved  of 
the  Father  before  the  foundation  of  the  world;  and  the  perfect 
knowledge  of  God — each  and  all  of  these  facts  being  such  as 
can  be  affirmed  or  implied  of  no  one  who  is  less  than  divine. 
Must  we  not  therefore  infer  that  his  conception  of  the  unity  of 
God  did  not  in  his  mind  conflict  with  his  own  assumption  of 
these  divine  attributes  and  relations  ? 

The  passage  (1  Cor.  8  :  4-6)  has  been  referred  to  above.  It  is 
remarkable  for  its  very  explicit  antithesis  with  polytheism 
("  though  there  be  that  are  called  gods,  as  there  are  gods  many, 
and  lords  many");  also  for  the  somewhat  close  definition  of  the 
Christrian  doctrine — "  the  one  God,  the  Father,  of  whom  are  all 
things  and  we  in  him ;  and  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by  whom  are 
all  things  and  we  by  him." It  is  not  easy  to  see  how  a  some- 
what distinct  personality — personality  of  some  sort — could  be 
more  definitely  expressed  than  it  is  here.  The  only  real  ques- 
tion upon  this  passage  is  whether  the  creatorship,  attributed  here 
to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  involves  true  divinity.  Did  the  Logos 
create  by  means  of  a  derived  and  delegated  power,  of  such  sort 
as  might  be  exercised  by  a  being  of  derived  existence  and  of  at- 
tributes less  than  divine  ? Bearing  against  such  a  supposition, 

we  have  the  uniform  strain  of  the  Scriptures  which  in  numerous 
passages  appeal  to  creatorship  as  the  highest  proof  of  true  divin- 
ity. See  Heb.  3:  4:  "He  that  built  all  thiags  is  God."  Jer. 
lU;  11,  12:  "Thus  shall  ye  say  to  them"  (idolatrous  heathen) — 
"  The  gods  that  have  not  made  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  even 
thej  shall  perish  from  the  earth  and  from  under  these  heavens." 
"  He  "  (the  true  God)  "  hath  made  the  earth  by  his  power,"  etc. 
Ps.  96:  5:  "  For  all  the  gods  of  the  nations  are  idols;  but  the 
Lord  made  the  heavens."     See  also  Isa.  42 :  5,  and  44 :  24. 

It  seems  therefore  undeniable  that  our  finite  minds  are  ex- 
pected to  accord  the  attributes  of  true  divinity  to  him  Avho  is  re- 
vealed to  us  in  the  Scriptures  as  universal  creator. 

In  Eph.  4:5,  6,  occurs  an  exhortation  to  Christian  unity, 
based  on  the  oneness  of  all  the  vital  elements  of  the  gospel 
scheme — there  being  in  it  but  one  Lord  [Jesus]  ;  one  sort  of  sav- 
ing faith  ;  "  one  God  and  Father  of  all"  Christians  (Jew  or  Gen- 
tile), "  who  is  above  all,  through  all,  in  all."  If  there  were  many 
gods,  there  might  be  as  much  foundation  for  many  diverse  sects 
or  sorts  of  worshipers  as  there  would  be  for  any  one  sect.  Per- 
fect moral  unity  between  the  Lord  Jesus  and  the  Father  is  vital 
to  Paul's  argument  in  this  passage:  such  a  unity  is  every -where 
implied;  often  affirmed. Over  against  this,  Jesus  is  never  rep- 
resented to  be  Lord  [of  all]  in  any  such  sense  as  conflicts  with 
tliese  affirmations  as  to  "  one  God  and  Father  of  all." 

In  1  Thess.  1 :  9,  Paul  wrote — "  Ye  turned  to  God  from  idols  to 


DIVINITY  OF  CHRIST  AND  TRINITY  OF  GOD.  379 

serve  the  living  and  true  God,  and  to  wait  for  his  Son  from 
heaven,"  etc. — a  passage  of  importance  as  showing  how  naturally 
the  inspired  minds  of  that  age  put  in  contrast  the  serving  of  idols 
and  the  serving  of  the  one  living  and  true  God.  But  the  unity  of 
God  as  oj^posed  to  polytheism  is  not  necessarily  a  unity  inconsist- 
ent with  tripersonality. 

Let  it  be  noted  also  that  "  waiting  for  his  Son  from  heaven  "  as 
explained  in  the  New  Testament  involves  and  implies  the  real  di- 
vinity of  the  Son,  so  that  "  turning  to  God  fron'i  idols  "  does  not 
exclude  divine  homage  to  the  Son.  To  regard  the  Son  as  divine 
is  not  idolatry.  Yet  it  would  be  if  God's  unity  were  of  such  a 
sort  as  must  rule  out  the  real  divinity  of  the  Son. 

Twice  in  Paul's  first  epistle  to  Timothy,  he  brings  out  strongly 
the  doctrine  of  the  divine  unity,  viz.  in  1  Tim.  1:  17,  and  G:  15, 
16:  "Now  unto  the  King  eternal,  immortal,  invisible — the  only 
wise  God,  be  honor  and  glory  forever  and  ever;  amen."  The 
best  manuscripts  omit  the  word  "  wise  ;  "  the  best  critics  decide 
against  its  authority.  The  omission  improves  the  sense — the 
thought  being  manifestly,  not  that  the  eternal  King  is  the  only 
God  who  has  wisdom,  but  the  only  real  God  who  exists  at  all. 
We  must  accept  this  passage  as  an  explicit  af&rmation  that  there 
is  but  one  God;  yet  nothing  in  the  context  indicates  that  the  in- 
spired apostle,  either  by  implication  or  otherwise,  meant  to  deny 
that  the  Son  is  also  divine.  The  passage  has  no  apparent  refer- 
ence of  any  sort  to  the  Son  or  to  the  Holy  Ghost. The  other 

passage  runs  thus:  "Which  in  his  times  he  shall  show"  [z.  e. 
which  appearing  of  the  Lord  Jesus  he  shall  exhibit — cause  to  be 
seen — in  its  due  time] — "even  he  who  is  the  Blessed  and  only  Po- 
tentate ;  the  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords;  who  only  hath  im- 
mortality, dwelling  in  the  light  which  no  man  can  approach  unto; 
whom   no   man  hath   seen  or  can  see  :    to  whom  be  honor  and 

power  everlasting.     Amen." Thus  in  most  sublime  strains  this 

passage  bears  human  thought  back  of  him  who  reveals  God  to 
created  minds,  to  the  Great  Unseen  and  Unapproachable — the 
deathless  One  of  whom  immortality  is  a  prime  attribute,  and 
Avhose  power  over  his  universe  is  simply  supreme  and  eternal — 
"  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords."  Yet  these  epithets  which  ex- 
press supreme  power  ai-e  elsewhere  applied  with  unabated  fullness 
and  force  to  the  Lord  Jesus.  He  too  is  "  King  of  kings  and  Lord 
of  lords  "  (Rev.  17  :  14,  and  19  :  16) — as  indeed  we  might  expect 
from  his  own    declaration: — "All  power  is  given  unto    me  in 

heaven   and   in  earth"   (Matt.  28:   18). If  to  any  one   these 

words — "  all  poAver  r/iven  " — should  seem  to  indicate  that  the  very 
nature  of  the  Son  is  inferior — of  lower  grade  as  to  divinity  than 
that  of  the  Fathei- — "  the  Blessed  and  only  Potentate  "—it  de- 
serves special  consideration  that  this  apparent  inferiority  may  be 
o)il>j  apparent — not  real;  due  to  the  subordinate  part  he  acts  in 
the  great  scheme  of  human  redemption,  and  not  to  any  intrinsic 
inferiority  of  nature.  It  certainly  does  not  appear  that  these  lofty 
terms  of  majesty  are  applied  to   the  Father  for  the  purpose  of 


380         DIVINITY  OF  CHRIST  AND  TRINITY  OF  GOD. 

proving  the  natural  inferiority  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Spirit.  Ap- 
parently the  Son  is  l)efore  the  eye  of  Paul  as  seen  in  his  mcarnu- 
iion — coming  back  from  heaven  to  the  final  judgment  of  the  race 
— which  fact  of  itself  implies  a  i^osition  of  relative  subordination 
to  the  Father,  yet  without  by  any  means  assuming  in  the  pre-ex- 
istent  Son  a  lower  grade  of  divinity — (or  better  expressed)  a  grade 
of  attributes  less  than  really  divine. 

Last,  we  notice  the  extraordinary  passage  with  which  John 
closes  his  first  epistle  (1  John  5:  20):  "We  know  that  the  Son 
of  God  is  come  and  hath  given  us  an  understanding  that  we  may 
know  Him  that  is  true"  (the  true  One,  and  not  as  some  copies 
have  it,  the  true  doctrine  or  thing)  ;  and  we  are  in  him  that  is 
true — in  his  Son  Jesus  Christ.  "  This  [one]  is  the  true  God  and 
eternal  life." This  passage  deseiwes  to  be  studied  with  the  ut- 
most care.  A  paraphrase  will  help  to  present  my  view  of  it — 
thus  :  We  know  that  we  have  attained  the  knowledge  of  the  true 
God  (the  great  Avorld  around  us  have  not);  for  we  are  certain  that 
the  Son  of  God  has  come  and  has  revealed  to  us  such  truth  and 
hath  given  us  such  apprehension  of  it  that  Ave  know — not  merely 
may  know,  but  (according  to  the  best  manuscripts)  do  know  Him 
who  is  the  true  God.  We  not  only  know  him  but  we  are  in  him 
— that  is  to  say,  we  are  in  his  Son  Jesus  Christ.  To  be  in  the 
true  God  is  to  be  in  his  Son ;  and  to  be  in  the  Son  is  to  be  in 
the  true  God,  for  this  one,  Jesus  Christ  his  Son,  is  the  true  God 

and   eternal  life. The   clause   which   in  our   English  version 

commences  with  the  word  "even"  in  Italics  must  stand  in  gram- 
matical apposition  and  therefore  be  identified  in  thought  with  the 
clause  next  preceding.  We  are  in  him  who  is  the  true  God,  the 
Father,  by  being  in  his  Son  Jesus  Christ.  To  be  in  Christ  is 
equivalent  to  being  in  the  Father — carries  with  it  the  same  rela- 
tion toward  the  Father — because  his  Son  Jesus  Christ  is  the  true 
God  and  is  the  fountain  of  eternal  life. 

Beyond  these  statements  as  to  the  metaphysical  relations  of 
the  divine  Father  and  the  divine  Son,  John  does  not  carry  us. 
Was  this  exposition  of  it  satisfactory  to  his  own  mind  ?  It 
would  be  very  difficult  to  prove  that  it  was  not.  He  drops  no 
word  which  even  suggests  tiiat  he  saw  in  these  statements  any 
conflict  v>'ith  the  unity  of  God. 

It  is  now  in  place  to  bring  under  special  consideration  some  of 
the  leading  theories  which  have  been  proposed  and  more  or  less 
extensively  held  as  harmonizing  the  unity  of  God  with  the  scrip- 
tural representations  of  his  tripersonality.  Do  they,  any  of  them, 
meet  the  required  conditions  ? 

1  arrange  them  as  follows : 

1.  That  the  Logos  is  a  created  being;  the  fii-st-born  and  the 
highest,  but  yet  really  deriving   his  existence  from  the  Father, 

Avho  is  the  one  God  only. It  does  not  essentially  improve  this 

theory  to  say  that  the  Son  came  into  being  by  "  emanation"  from 
the  Father;  nor  to  say  [with  Lessing]  that  "  to  think,  to  will,  and 


-       DIVINITV  OF  CHRIST  AND  TRINITY  OF  GOD.        381 

to  ci-eate,  arc  -with  God  one,"  and  that  so,  God  projected  his 
thought  of  himself  into  an  existent  person,  "  wanting  in  no  per- 
fection ^vhich  he  himself  possessed."  No  matter  -what  the  mode 
of  putting  forth  creative  power  may  have  been.  The  vital  point 
is  a  derived  existence,  which  necessarily  carries  with  it  the  denial 
of  his  eternal  being,  and  indeed  the  denial  of  all  truly  divine 
attributes.  A  created  being  may  be  very  great ;  but  no  created 
being  can  be  God.  No  created  being  can  be  Avorthy  of  worship 
as  God.  No  created  being  can  sit  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Fa- 
ther on  the  throne  of  universal  dominion,  enjoying  equal  honors 
and  praises  Avith  the  Father.  To  admit  this  at  all  is  to  subvert 
the  eternal  and  necessary  distinction  between  the  Infinite  and 
the  finite;  is  to  annihilate  all  just  notions  of  the  worship  due  to 
the  Infinite  God  and  to  him  only. 

2.  That,  ontologically  considered,  there  is  no  original,  essential 
distinction  to  which  the  term  "  person  "  can  apply.  The  language 
of  tire  Scriptures  is  to  be  explained  as  simply  bold  personifica- 
tion, there  being  at  bottom  nothing  bej^ond  distinct  manifestation. 
God  unrevealed  is  Father;  but  God  considered  as  revealing  him- 
self to  his  intelligent  creatures,  whether  before  or  after  the  in- 
carnation, is  the  Logos :  considered  as  energizing  morally  in  the 
hearts  of  moral  creatures  for  their  regeneration  and  holiness,  he 
is  called  the  Spirit.  It  is  only  the  one  God,  working  in  these  di- 
verse forms — much  as  the  same  one  man  may  be  a  son  to  his  par- 
ents; a  father  to  his  children;  a  husband  to  his  wife;  a  magis- 
trate to  the  civil  community;  a  phj'sician  in  professional  business. 

This  theory  might  relieve  the  philosophical  difficulties  quite 
satisfactorily  if  only  it  could  be  made  to  meet  sensibly  the  con- 
ditions of  the  scriptural  representations.  But  to  meet  these  con- 
ditions is  entirely  vital;  and  is  indefinitely  more  important  than 
to  relieve  our  mundane  philosoph3^  If  we  accept  the  Scriptures 
as  a  revelation  from  God,  we  must  at  least  give  tliem  a  fair,  com- 
mon sense  interpretation. 

Let  this  theory  be  tested  by  applying  it  to  the  Scriptures  in 
question.  Let  "  Father"  be  the  name  for  the  first  manifestation; 
Son,  for  the  second;  Spirit,  for  the  third. The  first  manifesta- 
tion loves  the  second  and  has  given  all  power  unto  it:  the  second 
manifestation  addresses  the  first,  speaks  of  the  glory  enjoyed  with 
it  before  the  woi'ldwas,  and  aspires  to  return  and  enjoy  again  the 
same  glory.  The  second  manifestation  was  from  eternity  with 
the  first  and  was  really  God.  Sometimes  the  first  is  represented 
as  sending  forth  the  thii-d,  and  sometimes  the  second  does  the 

same  thing. It  seems  therefore  that  if  we  fall  back  to  the  facts 

affirmed  in  Scripture  in  reference  to  the  things  said  and  done  by 
these  several  manifestations  toward  each  other  and  toward  our 
lost  world  for  its  redemption,  we  find  these  manifestations  to  be 
reall}'  persons,  despite  of  our  new  and  improved  philosophical  no- 
menclature. They  fulfill  the  functions  of  personality.  They  have 
the  mutual  affections  characteristic  of  personality,  and  bear  to  each 
other  and  to  the  universe  the  mutual  relations  of  distinct  persons. 


382        DIVINITY  OF  CHRIST  AND  TRINITY  OF  GOD. 

It  will  perhaps  be  replied  that  these  words  of  Scripture  are  bold 
personification,  and  nothing  more :  that  the  first  manifestation  is 
personified  as  Father;  the  second  as  Logos,  etc.  The  reply  to 
this  would  be  that  high  bold  personification  has  its  proper  atmos- 
phere and  home  in  the  realms  of  fancy  and  imagination,  and  is 
entirely  inadmissible  elsewhere.  The  cool,  good  sense  of  man- 
kind rebels  utterly  against  its  introduction  in  prosaic,  matter-of- 
fact  narration.  The  style  and  tone  of  John's  gospel  are  altogether 
of  this  latter  sort.  To  make  this  gospel  history  an  allegory,  after 
the  model  of  Bunyan's  "Christian  Pilgrim"  or  Hannah  More's 
"Parley  the  Porter,"  would  shock  the  common  sense  of  honest 
readers.  The  theory  of  manifestations  in  place  of  personality  or  as 
its  philosophical  explanation,  does  violence  to  all  fair  principles 
of  interpretation  and  is  therefore  inadmissible. 

3.  A  third  theory  assumes  that  the  entire  group  of  mental 
attributes  or  powers  requisite  to  constitute  a  moral  agent  (classi- 
fied well  into  intelligence,  sensibility  and  free  will),  Avhen  exist- 
ing in  combination,  constitute  the  one  God.  These  mental  attri- 
butes, broken  up  and  rearranged  or  distributed,  constitute  sev- 
erally the  respective  persons  who  appear  in  Scripture  as  Father, 
Son  and  Holy  Ghost.  No  one  of  the  several  persons  possesses 
the  entire  group.  Thus,  it  would  seem,  we  must  understand  Al- 
ford,  his  language  being  this  (Com.  p.  615):  "The  Son  never 
ivorks  of  himself,  but  always  as  the  revelation  of  the  Father;" 
"  his  work  is  the  Father's  will,  and  the  Father  has  no  Will  except 
the  Son  who  is  all  his  will."  "The  Christian  Fathers  rightly  re- 
jected the  Semi-Arian  formula: — 'The  Son  was  begotten  by  an 

act  of  the  Father's  will' — for  lie  is  that    Will  himself." The 

statements  of  Athenagoras  (one  of  the  Fathers  in  the  second 
century)  seem  to  agsume  this  theory:  "The  Son  being  in  the 
Father  and  the  Father  in  the  Son,  in  oneness  and  power  of  Spirit, 
the  understanding  and  reason  [nous  and  logos]  of  the  Father  is 
the  Son  of  God.  If  you  inquire  what  is  meant  by  the  Son,  I  will 
state  briefly  that  he  is  the  first  product  of  the  Father,  not  as  having 
been  brought  into  existence  (for  from  the  beginning  God  who  is 
the  Eternal  Mind  [nous]  had  the  Logos  in  himself,  being  from 
eternity  instinct  with  Logos  ['logikos'j);  but  inasmuch  as  he  came 
forth  to  be  the  idea  and  the  energizing  power  of  all  material 
things  which  lay  like  a  nature  without  attributes  and  an  inactive 
earth,  the  grosser  particles  being  mixed  up  with  the  lighter"  (p. 
385). Again  :  "  For  we  acknoAvledit^e  a  God,  and  a  Son,  his  Lo- 
gos, and  a  Holy  Spirit,  united  in  essence — the  Father,  Son  and 
Spirit,  because  the  Son  is  the  Intelligence,  Eeason,  Wisdom  of  the 
Father;  and  the  Spirit  an  effluence,  as  light  from  fire"  (p.  405). 

In  examining  this  theory  the  reader  should  be  cautioned  to 
keep  it  distinct  from  the  one  immediately  preceding — viz.  the 
theory  of  personification,  or  simply  diverse  manifestation. 

The  theory  now  under  discussion  must  be  carefully  analyzed. 
What  does  it  mean  and  imply  ?  Does  it  mean  that  the  Logos, 
going  forth  from  God  as  the  Will,  took   from    the   Godhead  all 


DIVLMTY  OF  CIIUIST  AND  TRLXITY  OF  GOD.        383 

there  was  of  the  Will-jyoiocr,  leaving  none  to  the  Father  and 
none  to  the  Spirit:  i.  e.  leaving  to  the  Father  and  to  the  Spirit 
only  intelligence  and  sensibility ;  and,  moreover,  does  it  mean 
that  the  Logos,  going  forth  thus  as  the  Will-power,  took  from 
the  Godhead  this  power  onhj,  and  no  intelligence — no  sensibil- 
ity ?  If  so,  then  we  must  ask — How  mere  Will-power  is  to  act 
to  purpose  without  intelligence  and  without  sensibility  ?  What 
moral  quality  could  there  be  in  the  exercises  of  such  Will- 
power ?  How  can  such  exercises  be  supposed  to  be  worthy  of 
love  and  of  honor  and  glory  from  the  Father  ? And,  more- 
over, how  utterly  inert  must  the  Father  and  the  Spirit  be — all 
Will-power  being  abstracted  ?  How  does  this  theory  help  us 
conceive  of  Father,  Logos  and  Spirit  as  each  working  severally 
in  his  respective  sphere  or  function,  e.  g.  in  the  scheme  of  hu- 
man redemption  ? 

Returning  to  the  theory  in  question,  we  ask  again — Does  it 
allow, to  the  Logos  a  moderate  amount  of  intelligence  and  sen- 
sibility, but  an  extra  amount — a  very  special  development — of 
the  will-power  ?  And,  as  to  the  Father  and  the  Spirit,  does  it 
in  a  corresponding  manner  accord  to  them  a  diminished  will- 
force,  but  intelligence  and  sensibility  in  full  divine  measure  ? 
Then  we  must  ask — What  is  gained  by  this  reapportion- 
ment of  the  respective  elements  requisite  to  mental  and  moral 
action  ?  Is  it  supposable  that  the  Son  acts  with  more  energy 
of  Avill  than  the  Father,  or  than  the  Spirit  ?  Or  that  he  acts 
with  somewhat  less  intelligence,  or  with  less  of  the  sensibility 
of  emotion,  desire,  affection  ?  What  is  the  proof  of  either  of 
these  points?  Does  this  theory  bring  any  help  whatever  to  the 
proper  understanding  of  the  scriptural  representations  on  this 
subject? 

Yet  again;  may  we  suppose  this  to  be  theory — viz.  that  God, 
considered  as  putting  forth  the  energy  of  his  will,  is  the  Logos  ; 
that  God,  considered  as  loving  the  well-being  of  creatures  and 
consulting  with  himself  in  wisdom  and  forming  the  great  plans 
of  creation  and  redemption,  is  the  Father ;  and,  moreover,  con- 
sidered as  carrying  out  the  scheme  in  the  appliances  of  moral 

power  [truth,  persuasion],  is  the  Spirit? Then  we  have  these 

problems  to  solve  :  how  the  will-power  in  repose  during  the  past 
eternity  can  be  said  to  have  been  "with  God"  and  to  "be  God;" 
how  the  will-power,  going  forth  in  time  for  its  activities  in  hu- 
man redemption,  can  be  said  to  be  God  ;  also,  how  God,  con- 
sidered as  doing  the  work  of  the  Logos,  can  be  an  object  of 
love  to  God  considered  as  not  doing  this  work,  but  simply  as 
giving  up  his  Logos  to  do  it  ? 

Thus  if  wo  carry  out  this  theory  in  its  actual  application  to 
the  words  and  to  the  apparent  sense  of  Scripture,  we  shall  find 
that  we  either  have  (despite  of  our  theory)  the  distinct  personal- 
ity which  we  are  seeking  to  escape  because  of  its  philosophical 
diiSculties  ;  or  we  slide  into  the  theory  of  no  distinction  save 
in  simple  manifestation;  or  we  abstract  all  sense  and  make  non- 


384        DIVINITY  OF  CHRIST  AND  TRINITY  OF  GOD. 

sense  of  the  scriptural  conceptions  and  representations  as  to 
the  mutual  work  and  relations  of  Father,  Son  and  Spirit. 

4.  Yet  another  theor^^  labors  to  construct  a  Trinity  by  first 
making  out  a  duality  in  all  moral  beings,  resting  upon  the  ca- 
pacity of  self-knowledge.  This  capacity,  we  shall  readily  see, 
belongs  necessarily  to  all  moral  agents — human  or  divine — be- 
cause without  this  power  of  knowing  one's  self,  there  could  be 
no  self-culture  and  no  conscience ;  no  compunction  for  wrong- 
doing; no  intelligent  self-approval  for  doing  right. 

Now  in  making  up  a  duality  of  persons  (suppose  iu  either 
God  or  man)  these  speculative  philosophers  reason  thus  :  "  I 
know  myself."  I  who  have  this  knowledge  am  one ;  self,  the 
object  of  this  knowledge,  is  another,  counting  two — the  knower 
and  the  known.  Thus,  say  they,  we  certainly  have  a  duality 
in  all  morally  acting  minds ;  and  we  need  but  one  more  to  make 
up  a  trinity. 

There  are  at  least  two  fatal  objections  to  this  theory. (1.) 

That  two  is  not  there,  but  lacks  one  of  it.  This  difficulty,  be- 
ing mathematical,  is  thoroughly  stubborn.  Moreover,  there  is  no 
room  for  the  third  in  this  category.  A  third  party — standing  on 
the  same  footing,  of  the  same  sort — is  a  natural  impossibility. 
The  great  fact  of  a  capacity  for  self-knowledge  provides  for  an 
ajiparent  duality  (only  apparent,  however,  not  real),  but  can 
never  provide  for  even  an  apparent  Trinity.  There  can  be  no 
third  party  springing  up  out  of  this  capacity  for  self-knowledge. 

(2.)  A  second  objection  equally  fatal  is  that  this  apparent  du- 
ality is  restricted  to  self-knowledge  and  disappears  the  moment 
we  pass  beyond  it.     As  to  all  other  activities  and   functions  of 

mind  even  this  duality  has  no  existence. This  will  be  seen  if 

we  lay  side  by  side  the  following  propositions. (a.)  God  knows 

himself — an  apparent  duality;  God  and  self (6.)  God  knows 

man  : — two  entirely  distinct  parties.  The  proposition  makes  not 
the  least  approach  toAvard  a  duality  in  God.  God  and  him- 
self here   coalesce   in  one,   with  no  conceivable  distinction. 

(c.)  Again,  God  creates  matter.  Here  is  no  shadow  of  distinc- 
tion between  God  and  himself  This  distinction  which  Avas  sup- 
posed to  appear  when  the  point  affirmed, was  self-knowledge,  dis- 
appears at  once  and  universally  when  we  stejj  beyond  the  realm 
of  self-knowledge.  Therefore,  for  the  point  now  in  question — a 
duality  or  trinity  to  be  developed  in  the  work  of  human  redemp- 
tion, this  theory  is  utterly  valueless.  The  functions  requisite  in 
this  great  scheme  have  no  affinity  with  self-knowledge.  They  call 
for  outgoing  activities  altogether  foreign  to  the  study  or  concep- 
tion of  one's  own  mental  states  or  acts,  and  therefore  by  their 
very  nature  shut  off  all  aid  from  this  apparent  duality  of  persons. 

5.  Yet  another  theory  which  has  found  favor  perhaps  more  ex- 
tensively than  any  other  among  evangelical  Christians,  rests  on 
an  assumed  distinction  between  essence  or  substance,  and  its 
attributes. 

Commencing  our  analysis  with  matter,  we  naturally,  perhaps 


DIVINITY  OF  CIIillST  AND  TRINITY  OF  GOD.         385 

noccssarilj,  think  of  a  basis  or  substratum,  underlying  its  quali- 
ties. A  lump  of  matter  has  form,  color,  weight,  etc.,  etc. — quali- 
ties, AVC  call  them ;  but  wa  are  Avont  to  assume  a  basis  of  simple 
matter  in  Avhich  these  diverse  qualities  inhere,  albeit  it  might 
puzzle  us  to  say  what  basis  Avould  remain  if  all  these  qualities, 
attributes,  were  taken  out  of  it. 

From  this  stepping-stone  wc  ascend  to  our  conception  of  spirit. 
Here  too  Ave  seem  compelled  to  think  of  some  substratuiii,  some 
basis  AA'hich  men  are  Avout  to  call  essence  or  substance.  In 
this  essence  there  exist  the  A'arious  spiritual  faculties  or  poATcrs 
Avhich  are  called  attributes.  Noav  a  theory  to  explain  the  trinity 
of  persons  in  the  Godhead  has  been  built  on  this  assumed  dis- 
tinction between  essence  and  attributes.  The  three  persons  are 
said  to  be  in  essence  one,  but  in  grouping  of  attributes  three.  Jt 
is  said  that  although  in  the  subject  man  there  can  be  but  one 
group  of  attributes  in  any  one  spiritual  essence  or  substance,  yet 
Ave  knoAV  too  little  of  God  to  deny  the  possibility  of  a  triune  dis- 
tinction in  his  nature — i.  e.  a  threefold  grouping  of  attributes  in 
one  divine  essence. 

Of  this  theory  Ave  may  at  least  say,  it  is  impossible  to  disprove 
it.  It  may  possibly  be  the  true  solution  of  the  mystery.  It  makes 
entirely  in  its  favor  that  it  does  not  build  on  any  supposed  anal- 
ogy in  the  nature  of  man.  Most  obviously  there  is  no  such  anal- 
orpj.  Man  has  no  t;.-inity  in  his  being  analogous  to  that  Avhich 
tile  Scriptures  assume  as  to  God;  and  the  assumption  that  he  has 
can   never  subserve   any  other  end   than  to  perplex,   confound, 

and  mislead. In  candor  I  must  also  express  it  as  my  opinion 

that,  while  this  theory  can  not  be  disproved,  so  also  it  can  not 
be  proA'ed.  The  elements  of  the  problem  lie  beyond  our  depth — 
in  the  mysteries  of  the  Infinite  jNlind. 

In  conclusion  I  call  special  attention  to  the  following  points  : 

1.  The  sacred  Avriters  (John  and  Paul)  make  no  attempt  to  har- 
monize the  trinity  of  God  with  his  unity.  Indeed  they  Avrite  as 
if  they  Avere  entirely  unconscious  of  any  discrepancy  betAveen 
them.  They  seem  to  have  no  thought  of  any  incompatibility  be- 
tween their  conception  of  one  only  Supreme  God,  and  the  equal 
divinity  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  I 
find  no  allusion  to  this  subject  as  one  iuA'olving  mystery ;  much 
less  any  attempt  to  explain  it  as  if  it  demanded  explanation  in 
oi'der  to  its  intelligent  reception  and  practical  utility.  Paul  does 
seem  to  speak  of  the  incarnation  as  a  great  mj^stery :  "  AVithout 
controversy  great  is  the  mj-stery  of  godliness;  God  Avas  mani- 
fest in  the  flesh ;  justified  in  the  Spirit;  seen  of  angels;  preached 
unto  the  Gentiles;  believed  on  in  the  world;  received  up  into 
glory"  (1  Tim.  3:  16).  On  the  face  of  it  this  passage  seems  to 
refer  to  the  incarnation,  and  to  this  only:  not  at  all,  to  the  rela- 
tions of  the  trinity  to  the  unity  of  God.  Xo  similar  utterance  as 
to  the  trinity  appears  in  either  Paul  or  John.  May  we  assume 
that  they  had  no  sense  of  mj^stei'V  in  these  relations  ?  Shall  Ave 
conclude  that  they  had  a  theory  Avhich  relieved  the  subject  of  all 


386        DIVINITY  OF  CHRIST  AND  TRINITY  OF  GOD. 

its  otherwise  apparent  mystery,  or  that  they  accepted  it  as  a 
mystery   beyond  the   comprehension  of  human   thouo;ht  in  this 

earthly  state,  and  therefore  wisely  j^assed  it  in  utter  silence  ? 

A  few  words  from  their  lips  or  pen  might  have  helped  us  to  de- 
cide between  these  two  alternatives;  but  for  such  words  we  look 
in  vain.  Probably  it  is  well  left  where  it  is.  If  we  may  suppose 
that  the  teaching  Spirit  determined  in  their  case  what  not  to  say 
as  well  as  what  to  say,  we  must  rest  in  this  conclusion. 

This  course  of  remark  applies  not  only  to  passages  in  which 
John  or  Paul  express  their  own  thought  (under  inspiration  of 
course),  but  also  to  those  in  which  John  (in  particular)  records 
the  spoken  words  of  Jesus;  e.  g.  in  his  discussions  with  the  Jews, 
and  in  his  prayer  (John  17)  watli  his  disciples.  Jesus  assumes 
his  pre-existeut  divinity;  his  eternal  existence  with  the  Father 
in  superlative  glory — yet  with  no  intimation  that  this  might  seem 
incomprehensible  to  human  thought,  or  might  so  stagger  our  hu- 
man conception  as  to  justify  repellent  skepticism.  He  neither 
suggests  that  these  things  involve  mystery  too  deep  to  be  fath- 
omed, nor  does  hevclunteer  any  metaphysical  explanation  to  re- 
lieve Eujiposcd  incou'.patibility. 


EXOUESUS  11. 


What  is  said  In/  Jesus  Jiimsclf  as  to  Ids  then  future  comings, 
considered  ivilk  reference  to  modern  pre-millennial  theories. 

In  the  gospel  of  John  we  have  met  this  prolific  word  in  several 
passages.*  In  the  other  evangelists  also  it  occurs  in  various 
senses. f  ISlany  minds  are  confused  by  the  various  meanings  and 
various  applications  of  this  word.  Some  (as  I  believe)  have  rad- 
ically misappi'ehended  Christ's  meaning,  and  have  built  upon 
their  misconceptions  a  system  at  variance  with  the  real  doctrines 
of  Scripture — especially  this  : — That  Jesus  has  promised  to  come 
in  his  human  body,  long  -^v'lov  to  the  final  resurrection  and  gen- 
eral judgment,  to  set  up  a  sort  of  kingdom  unknown  before, 
reigning  visibly  over  his  people  and  virtually   superseding  the 

present  dispensation  of  the  Spirit. Some  hold  this  modified 

view — that  the  Scriptures  arc  not  clear  on  this  point;  that  this 
visible  coming  and  new  kingdom  may  be  the  true  sense  of  Scrip- 
ture ; — may  therefore  become  real,  but  that  as  they  understand  the 
Scriptures,  the  question  is  left  open  and  unsettled. 

It  is  entirely  vital  to  any  useful  discussion  of  tliis  subject  that 
we  have  definite  views  of  the  system  built  upon  the  supposed 
visible  coming  and  personal  reign  of  Christ. 

Is  it  {a.)  That  the  righteous  dead  are  to  be  raised  to  live  and 
reign  with  Christ  in  immortal  bodies  ?  This  is  generally  if  not 
universally  held  as  a  part  of  the  system. 

Is  it  {b.)  That  when  Jesus  shall  visibly  come,  all  living  saints 

will  be  changed  from  mortal  to  immortal? 1  suppose  this  also 

is  the  current  opinion  of  those  who  hold  to  this  visible  coming 
and  earthly  reign. 

Is  it  (c.)  That  the  wicked,  living  on  the  earth  at  the  supposed 
coming  are  to  be  destroyed  by  judgments;  and  if  so,  is  this  de- 
struction universal,  and  are  no  more  wicked  men  to  live  on  the 
earth,  and  is  probation  to  cease?  Then  the  outcome  of  the  sys- 
tem is — an  end  to  probation  in  this  world ;  an  end  to  labor  for 

*  E.  g.  14 :  2,  3,  16-18,  '23,  28,  and  21 :  22,  23. 

t  Matt.  16:  27,  28,  and  its  parallels  (which  are,  Mark  9:  1,  and 
Luke  9:  27) ;  Matt.  24:  29-34,  and  its  parallels  (viz.  Mark  13:  24-30, 
and  Luke  21:  27,  31,  32);  also  Matt.  26:  64,  and  Luke  18:  8. 

(387) 


388     ON  CHRIST'S  COMING  FOR  A  PERSONAL  REIGN. 

the  salvation  of  sinners;  a  real  transition  into  a  state  of  uni- 
versal retribution. In  regard  to  this  schenie,  Ave  must  ask — 

What  is  the  benefit  of  cutting  off  all  further  labor  for  the  salvation 
of  men?  What  business  have  we  to  be  longing  and  praj'ing  that 
gospel  work  may  cease?  And  what  is  gained  by  having  the  fu- 
ture paradise  of  the  saints  located  on  this  planet  rather  than  in 
heaven  ? 

But  perhaps  the  more  common  view  is  that  ^  part  only  of  the 
wicked  found  on  the  earth  arc  to  be  cut  off;  that  a  part  survive 
and  will  continue  as  before  under  the  normal  laws  of  the  present 
life ;  that  gospel  work  will  still  go  on  among  them,  and  with 
greater  success  than  ever  before. 

Of  the  sj^stem  in  this  form  we  may  ask — Does  it  honor  the  Di- 
vine Spirit  to  assume  that  the  bodily  presence  of  Jesus  will  be 
more  efficient  toward  the  salvation  of  sinners  or  toward  the  spiritual 
life  and  joy  of  believers  than  the  Spirit's  invisible  power?  Does 
this  correspond  with  the  opinion  expressed  by  Jesus  himself: — 
"  It  is  expedient  for  you  that  I  go  away  "  (as  to  my  visible  per- 
son), "and  the  Comforter  come'^? 

Again :  the  doctrine  being  (supposably)  that  gospel  agencies  in 
this  new  reign  are  to  be  wielded,  not  by  mortals  but  by  immor- 
tals, then  how  about  "having  this  treasure  in  earthen  vessels 
that  the  excellency  of  the  power  may  be  of  God  and  not  of  man  "  ? 
Will  it  any  longer  be  God's  plan  "  by  the  foolishness  of  preaching 
to  save  them  that  believe"  ?  How  are  immortals  to  come  down  to 
mortals  in  the  sympathy  of  fellow-sufferers  and  reach  them  as 
standing  with  them  on  the  common  level  of  earthly  frailty  and  suf- 
fering ?  Who  can  be  very  sure  that  this  change  would  be  a  real 
improvement  upon  the  present  system  of  labor  for  the  salvation 

of  sons  and  daughters,  of  neighbors  and  fellow-sufferers? It 

may  seem  to  be  very  nice  to  be  lifted  at  once  out  of  all  earthly 
frailty,  but  the  farther  question  will  be — Ought  we  to  be  ready  to 
forego  the  facilities  which  our  kinship  with  sinners  gives  us  in 
labor  for  their  salvation?  If  men  are  tired  of  earthly  toil  and 
suffering  even  in  the  Master's  service,  for  the  salvation  of  the 
souls  he  died  to  save,  and  are  absolutely  impatient  to  get  out  of 
it,  then  they  have  the  question  to  settle  with  their  INIaster  whether 
he  will  modify  the  system  for  their  special  convenience,  relieving 
them  from  all  burdens— from  all  hard  work — from  all  liability  to 
the  infirmities  common  to  a  world  of  probation. 

But  some  may  say — You  misapprehend  the  system.  Only  the 
raised  saints  are  immortal;  the  living  are  to  remain  under  the 

normal  laws  of  our  present  life;  and  the  wicked  also. Then 

these  questions  will  arise :  Who  is  to  do  the  gospel  work — the 
mortals,  or  the  immortals  ?  If  there  is  to  be  co-operation,  then 
under  what  laws?  How  are  the  immortals  to  work  for  the  sal- 
vation  of  mortal   men? And  yet  again:  How  are  the  living 

saints  all  along  the  future  ages  of  this  new  system,  to  have  the  real 
presence  of  Christ  ?  Who  and  how  many  among  the  millions  of 
them  are  to  be  favored  with  the  special  privilege  of  seeing  hia 


ON  CHRIST'S  COMING  FOR  A  PERSONAL  REIGN.     389 

transfigured  form  and  of  hearing  his  celestial  voice?  With  or- 
gans of  sight  limited  to  a  few  hundred  feet,  more  or  less,  and  of 
hearing  yet  more  restricted  as  to  space,  -who  shall  hear  and  who 
shall  see  the  Son  of  man  in  this  new  form  of  his  manifestation? 
To  make  the  case  plain,  suppose  that  -when  Jesus  trod  the  hills 
and  valleys  of  Judea  and  of  Galilee,  instead  of  one  hundred  and 
twenty  disciples  in  and  about  Jerusalem  and  five  hundred  who 
could  bo  gathered  in  one  spot  in  Galilee,  there  had  been  as  many 
hundred  thousands  as  at  this  moment,  located  in  every  country 
on  the  face  of  the  earth,  how  many  of  them  could  have  set  their 
eyes  on  his  glorious  form,  or  bent  their  ears  to  his  inspiring 
voice  ?  How  many  of  them  all  could  have  sat  around  the  same 
table  with  him  or  wet  his  blessed  feet  with  their  2:)enitent  tears? 
Is  there  not  a  vast  amount  of  careless  thinking  and  thoughtless 
wishing  when  men  compare  the  possible  communion  of  saints 
with  Jesus,  spiritually  manifested  under  the  present  system,  with 
their  privileges  under  this  imagined  visible  reign  of  Christ  on 
earth,  themselves  being  still  subjected  to  their  present  limitations 
of  sense  ? 

Not  to  push  further  at  present  either  our  search  for  the  exact 
system  of  those  who  are  enamored  with  the  idea  of  Christ's  per- 
sonal reign  on  earth,  or  the  difliculties  we  should  find  in  its  adop- 
tion, let  us  rather  inquire  : 

Did  Jesus  x>romise  such  a  coming  and  such  a  reign  on  earth  7 
Has  this  sijstem  of  views  any  scriptural  bottom  whatever  ? 

To  answer  this  inquiry  satisfactorily,  wo  must  bring  under  con- 
sideration all  the  important  j^assages  in  which  Jesus  spake  of 
his  own  then  future  coming.  What  are  they,  and  what  do  they 
legitimately  mean? Of  course,  their  meaning  must  be  ascer- 
tained from  the  connection  in  Avhich  they  severally  stand,  and 
from  whatever  else  is  said  as  to  those  comings.  A  classification 
based  on  these  principles  will  exceedingly  facilitate  a  just  and 
clear  apprehension  of  the  whole  subject. 

The  passages  in  which  Christ  spake  of  his  then  future  comings 
may  be  brought  into  four  classes,  arranged  according  to  the 
various  senses,  or  perhaps  rather  j^n(?'^ose.9,  of  the  coming. 

1.  He  comes  for  the  purpose  of  taking  his  people  to  himself  at 
their  death. 

2.  He  comes  in  the  sense  of  manifesting  his  presence  in  the 
hearts  of  his  people  through  the  Divine  Spirit,  "  the  Comforter." 

3.  He  comes  in  power  (or  in  his  kingdom)  in  the  sense  of 
bringing  sore  judgments  on  Jerusalem  and  the  Jewish  nation, 
contemplated  as  a  great,  hostile,  persecuting  power. 

4.  He  comes  at  the  end  of  the  world  to  raise  all  the  dead,  and 

to  judge  all  mankind. His  coming  in  judgments  on  Jerusalem 

(No.  3)  is  in  several  passages  regarded  as  a  type  and  pledge  of 
this  final  coming,  and  consequently  the  two  are  brought  into 
specially  close  connection. 

1.  Following  out  this  classification,  I  place  in  the  first  class 
John  14  :  2,  3  :   "  In  my  Father's  house  are  many  mansions:  I  go 


390      ON  CHRIST'S  COMING  FOR  A  PERSONAL  REIGN. 

to  prepare  a  place  for  you.  And  if  I  go  and  prepare  a  place  for 
you,  1  WILL  COME  AGAix  and  receive  you  to  viyself:  that  where  I 

am,  there  ye  may  be  also." -It  seems  too  obvious  to  admit  of 

rational  doubt  that  these  words  refer  to  Christ's  coming  in  the 
event  of  death  to  take  each  believer  home  to  himself  in  heaven. 
This  construction  is  in  harmony  with  the  course  of  thought  in 
this  connection,  as  manifested  for  example  in  Christ's  words  to 
Peter  (13 :  36) — "  Whither  I  go  thou  canst  not  follow  me  now, 

but  thou  shalt  follow  me  afterwards  " — i.  e.  at   thy  death. 

Moreover,  the  only  alternative  construction  which  seems  at  all 
supposable  (viz.  that  this  coming  is  at  the  end  of  the  world,  and 
the  taking  of  them  to  himself  is  only  after  the  final  judgment)  is 
set  aside  by  the  doctrine  of  the  entire  New  Testament — that  Je- 
sus does  in  fact  take  his  people  to  himself  immediately  at  their 
death  :  "  This  day  shalt  thou  bo  with  me  in  Paradise  "  (Luke  23 : 
43).  The  beggar  (Lazarus)  "was  carried  by  angels  into  Abra- 
ham's bosom"  and  "  Avas  comforted"  (Luke  16:  22,  25);  "To 
depart"  (in  Paul's  view)  was  "  to  be  with  Christ"  (Phil.  1:  23), 
etc.,  etc.  The  Revelation  of  John  every-where  locates  departed 
saints  with  Jesus  even  then.  Hence  scripturally  the  idea  that 
this  coming  and  receiving  his  people  to  himself  refers  to  the  final 
judgment  is  untenable.  It  must  therefore  refer  to  his  coming  at 
the  death  of  each  individual  saint. 

2.  In  a  second  sense  of  "  coming,"  Jesus  comes  to  his  people 
in  the  manifestations  of  his  presence  by  and  through  the  Holy 
Spirit.  Thus  we  must  explain  John  14:  16-18,  23,  and  perhaps 
V.  28  :  "I  will  pray  the  Father,  and  he  will  give  you  another 
Comforter,  that  he  may  abide  with  you  forever,  even  the  Spirit 
of  truth:  .  .  Ye  know  him,  for  he  dwelleth  with  you,  and  shall  be 
in  you.  I  will  not  leave  you  comfortless;  I loiU  come  to  you" — 
i.  e.  come  in  the  person  of  this  "  other  Comforter  "  "  who  shall  re- 
ceive of  mine,  and   shall  show  it  unto  3'ou  "    (16:  14). This 

construction  is  most  abundantly  confirmed  throughout  this  con- 
text, the  next  verse  declaring — "  Yet  a  little  while  and  the  world 
seeth  me  no  more"  (his  body  being  removed  from  earth),  "  but  ye 
see  me" — i.  e.  through  the  manifestations  made  of  me  to  your 

souls  by  the  Spirit. Again,  (v.  23) :  "If  a  man  love   me   he 

will  keep  my  words  and  my  Father  will  love  him,  and  loe  icill 
come  unto  him  and  make  our  abode  with  him" — this  coming  be- 
ing expressed  (v.  21)  by  the  word  "  manifest."  See  also  v.  28: 
"Ye  have  heard  how  I  said  unto  you,  I  go  away  and  come  again 
unto  you " — probably  in  the  sense  of  spiritual  manifestations 
through  the  Holy  Ghost,  though  possibly  this  may  refer  to  John 
14:  3 — coming  again  to  receive  them  to  himself     To  one  or  the 

other  of  these  classes  this  passage  must  refer. The  reader  may 

compare  also  Rev.  3  :  20:  "I  will  come  in  unto  him  and  sup  with 
him,  and  he  with  me." 

3.  In  the  third  class  Jesus  speaks  of  himself  as  "  coming  in 
power"  or  "in  his  kingdom,"  in  the  sense  of  bringing  desolating 
judgments  on  Jerusalem,   and  makes  this  fearful  visitation  of 


ON  CHRIST'S  COMING  FOR  A  PERSONAL  REIGN.      391 

retributive  justice  a  type  and  pledge  of  his  final  judgment  of  the 
whole  race. 

The  standard  passages  are — Matt.  10:  27,  28,  with  its  parallels 
(Mark  8  :  38,  and  9:  1,  and  Luke  9 :  26,  27) ;  also  Matt.  24:  29- 

34,  with  its  parallels  (Mark  13 :  24-30,  and  Luke  21  :  31,  32). 

'J'hat  these  passages  have  one  reference  to  the  final  judgment  is 
unquestionable: — "The  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  the  glory  of 
his  Father  with  his  angels;  and  then  shall  he  reivard  every  man 
according  to  his  works" — nothing  less  than  the  final  judgment ; 
but  Jesus  adds — "  Verily  1  say  unto  you.  There  be  some  standing 
here  who  shall  not  taste  of  death  till  they  see  the  Son  of  man  com- 
ing in  his  kingdom  " — which  with  equal  certainty  must  bo  a  long 
anterior  coming,  of  somewhat  similar  character,  for  similar  pur- 
poses of  retributive  justice — yet,  falling  within  the  life-time  of 
that  generation,  must  refer  to  his  judgments  on  Jei-usalem.  We 
are  shut  up  to  the  same  construction  of  Matt.  24  and  its  parallels. 

It  may  in  some  cases  be  doubtful  in  which  class  (No.  3  or  No. 
4)  we  shall  locate  such  passages  as  Matt.  26  :  64:  "  Hereafter  ye 
shall  see  the  Son  of  man  sitting  on  the  right  hand  of  power  and 
coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven."  It  would  be  true  in  both  senses 
of  his  coming — in  the  nearer  future  by  terrible  judgments  on 
themselves,  their  city,  temple  and  nation ;  in  the  more  remote  fu- 
ture, on  his  "  great  white  throne  "  before  which  "  should  be  gath- 
ered all  nations."  For  our  present  purpose  it  is  of  no  special  con- 
sequence in  which  class  we  place  this  passage.  It  must  certainly 
fall  into  one  or  the  other.     Its  descriptive  terms  favor  the  latter — 

the  final  coming  to  judgment. Of  Luke  18 :  8 — "  When  the 

Son  of  man  cometh,  shall  he  find  faith  on  the  earth  ?  " — it  need 
only  be  said — there  is  nothing  in  the  connection  which  serves  to 
locate  it  at  all.  It  seems  to  have  been  left  indefinite  purposely. 
If  at  any  time  the  Son  of  man  should  come  to  see  (as  the  Lord 
looked  down  upon  the  world  in  Noah's  time  to  see  what  men  were 
doing)  would  he  find  faith  there  ?  There  is  not  hei*e  the  least  in- 
timation of  a  visible,  personal  coming,  nor  the  least  hint  of  setting 
up  a  personal  reign  on  the  earth. 

The  passage  (John  21:  22,  23)  has  been  discussed  in  its  place 
in  the  commentary. 

4.  Of  passages  in  the  fourth  class,  the  standard  one  is  Matt. 
25:  31-46.  The  others  of  most  importance  have  been  noticed  in- 
cidentally in  speaking  of  the  third  class.  The  purposes  and  re- 
sults of  this  coming  are  so  entirely  definite,  so  unlike  the  sup- 
posed personal  coming  for  a  visible  reign  on  the  earth,  that  there 
need  be  no  difficulty  in  referring  them  to  the  final  judgment. 

LTpon  these  passages  thus  classified,  I  remark — 

1.  Only  the  last  of  the  four  classes  contemplates  a  visible,  per- 
sonal coming.  The  first  may  be  by  angelic  ministration;  the  sec- 
ond is  spiritual — through  the  agency  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  the  third 
is  wrought  through  providential  agencies ;  the  fourth  and  this 
only,  is  a  coming  in  person,  visibly  manifest  before  the  universe. 

2.  None  of  these  passages  can  by  any  fair  construction  be  re- 


392      ON  CHRIST'S  COMING  FOR  A  PERSONAL  REIGN. 

moved  from  the  class  in  -which  it  is  here  arranged.  [This  must  be 
taken  as  the  author's  personal  conviction.] 

3.  Substantially,  I  think,  they  are  exhaustive  as  to  the  subject, 
comprising  all  the  passages  in  which  Jesus  speaks  of  himself  as 
yet  to  come.  No  passage  of  any  conceivable  importance  has  been 
omitted  intentionally. 

4.  Consequentl}^  none  of  these  passages  can  be  fairlj'  inter- 
preted to  promise  and  prove  a  visible  coming  yet  future  but  long 
prior  to  the  general  judgment,  for  the  purpose  of  inaugurating  a 
visible  reign  on  the  earth.     They  do  not  mean  such  a  coming. 

5.  Hence  this  doctrine  of  a  visible,  personal  coming  and  reign 
on,  the  earth  has  no  fotmclation  in  the  recorded  toords  of  Christ. 
So  far  as  his  vi'ords  ai'e  concerned,  it  is  a  theory  ■without  a  bottom. 
Nothing  that  Jesus  has  said  contains  the  doctrine,  or  gives  it  the 
least  support. 

These  facts  might  seem  to  constitute  a  sufficient  refutation  of 
this  theory ;  yet  somewhat  more  may  be  said — thus  : — 

{a.)  This  theory  of  a  personal  reign  of  Christ,  superseding  the 
present  dispensation  of  the  Spirit,  is  debarred  hy  its  nnicisdom. 
Jesus  himself  has  declared  the  present  system— the  spiritual  dis- 
pensation of  the  Spirit — to  be  better  :  "  It  is  expedient  for  you 
that  I  go  away"  (personally) — withdrawing  my  bodily  presence — 
"  that  the  Comforter  may  come."  "  If  I  go  not  away  he  will  not 
come;  if  I  go,  I  will  send  him  unto  you."  The  joint  presence  of 
both  (Jesus  in  the  body  and  the  Spirit  in  his  spiritual  power)  is 
not  contemplated  as  falling  within  the  divine  plan.  One  or  the 
other  separately,  but  never  both  present  and  combined — is  mani- 
festly assumed  and  implied  as  the  plan  of  God.  Jesus  affirms  the 
dispensation  of  the  Spirit  to  be  the  better  and  the  more  efficient. 

The  same  superiority  in  point  of  effective  poAver  is  implied 

also  in  those  words  of  Christ  (John  14:  12):  "He  that  believeth 
on  me,  the  works  that  I  do  shall  he  do  also;  and  greater  icorks 
than  these  shall  he  do,  because  I  go  to  the  Father" — because 
Jesus,  having  gone  to  the  Father,  will  send  upon  them  the  Spirit 
of  power. 

[On  the  alternative— either  Jesus  bodily,  or  the  Spirit  spirit- 
ually— but  not  both — see  tlie  commentary  under  John  16:  14,  15, 
p.  238-240.] 

(b.)  This  theory  of  Christ's  personal  reign  instead  of  the 
Spirit's  agency  is  debarred  by  the  expressed  and  implied  perpetu- 
ity of  the  Spirit's  dispensation,  till  the  end  of  the  world.  "That 
he  may  abide  with  you  forever"  (John  14:  16).  "Lo,  I  am  with 
you  alway"  (as  from  that  day  forward  by  the  manifestation  of  the 
Spirit)  "  even  to  the  end  of  the  world."  In  the  same  sense  in 
which  he  was  "tvith  them"  in  the  scenes  of  the  first  Christian 
Pentecost  and  onward,  he  would  be  to  the  end  of  time.  What 
his  presence  icas  and  what  it  signified  then,  it  was  to  be  to  the 
end. 

(c.)  This  theory  of  a  personal  reign  is  ruled  out  by  the  f\ict  that 
the  definite  points  it  makes  as  to   the  nature,  the  surroundings, 


ON  CHRIST'S  COMLXG  FOR  A  PERSONAL  REIGN.      393 

the  laws  and  -workings  of  this  supposed  personal  reign  are 
altogether  imaginary— are  simply  and  only  speculation — there  be- 
ing not  a  -word  from  Jesus  himself  which  throws  any  light  upon 
the  assumed  points  in  this  theory.  All  there  is  of  it  comes  from 
other  sources  than  the  words  of  <)esus.  Most  of  the  points  which 
make  up  this  ideal  coming  and  reign  seem  to  be  the  invention  of 
human  fancy  ;  the  rest  is  obtained  from  words  of  apostles  and 
prophets  misinterpreted.  It  ought  to  beget  the  gravest  doubts  as 
to  the  soundness  of  the  whole  scheme  that  Jesus  himself  said  ab- 
solutely nothing  about  such  a  visible  reign  in  this  icorlcl  of  pro- 
hation  and  mercy  and  of  gospel  work  for  the  salvation  of  men. 

(d.)  Nay,  more;  during  his  public  ministry  Jesus  persistently 
contended  against  the  notion  then  current  that  his  reign  was  to 
be  visible,  earthly,  like  that  of  human  kings  dependent  on  his  vis- 
ible presence.  This  notion  Avas  a  deeply  rooted  error  of  the  Jews 
of  his  generation,  strongly  imbedded  moreover  in  the  ideas  of  his 
own  disciples — so  strongly  that  it  embarrassed  and  retarded  their 
just  conceptions  of  the  nature  of  his  kingdom,  and  for  some 
time  (we  know  not  how  long)  tinged  with  more  or  less  of  error 
their  notions  of  this  kingdom. 

This  theory  of  Christ's  visible  coming  and  personal  reign  on 
earth  is  therefore  the  old  error  of  worldly  Jews  revived,  repro- 
duced, and  (sad  to  say)  pushed,  despite  of  the  life-long  opposition 
made  against  it  by  the  teachings  and  life  of  Jesus. 

{e.)  If  it  be  still  insisted  that  Jesus  has  promised  to  "come  in  his 
kingdom  ;  "  to  set  up  a  kingdom,  and  that  "  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
was  near  at  hand,"  etc.,  etc.;  and  that,  as  this  has  not  been  done 
3-et,  it  must  be  still  future  and  may  be  now  very  near  at  hand — 
I  reply : — The  testimony  of  Jesus  and  of  his  apostles  is  perfectlj^ 
decisive  to  the  point  that  this  kingdom  was  set  up  at  the  very  be- 
ginning of  the  gospel  age.  Both  he  and  they  began  their  preach- 
ing with  the  declaration:  "The  kingdom  of  God  [or  of  heaven] 
is  at  hand."  As  reported  by  Mark  (I  :  15)  Jesus  began  with  de- 
claring— "  The  time  is  fulfilled  and  the  kingdom  of  God  is  at 
hand.'  When  questioned  before  Pilate,  he  avowed  himself  to  be 
a  king  even  then — but  said  :  "  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world  " — 
not  of  earthly  sort — but  is  an  empire  of  truth — truth  ruling  and 
swaying  the  hearts  of  men. When  he  had  ascended  to  the  Fa- 
ther, Peter  proclaimed  (Acts  2:  36) — "Let  all  the  house  of  Is- 
rael know  assuredly  that  God  hath  made  that  same  Jesus  whom 
ye  have  crucified  both  Lord  and  Christ" — "Lord"  in  the  sense 
of  Monarch,  and  Christ  in  the  sense  of  Anoiiited  King.  What 
can  this  be  but  his  inauguration  as  King  in  his  long  promised 

kingdom? No  less  decisive  is  this  (Acts  5:  31):   "Him  hath 

God  exalted  with  his  right  hand  to  be  a  Prince  and  a  Savior  " — 
hath  exalted  already;   "  exalted  to  be  a  Prince" — a  King  on  his 

gospel  throne. Proofs  might  be  multiplied  almost  indefinitely 

to  the  same  purport — that  the  Scriptures  represent  Jesus  as  ex- 
alted and  enthroned  at  his  ascension,  to  be  universal  King  and 
Lord — precisely  fulfilling  all   the  promises  made  respecting  his 


394     ON  CHRIST'S  COMING  FOR  A  PERSONAL  REIGN. 

coming  in  his  gospel  kingdom.  As  illusti-ative  cases  (not  exhaust- 
ive) see  Phil.  2:  9-11,  and  1  Pet.  3:  22.  [Other  senses  of  the 
Avord  ''coming"  as  used  by  Jesus,  see  treated  above]. 

(/!)  As  a  last  argument  for  the  near  personal  coming  and  per- 
sonal reign  of  Christ,  it  may  perhaps  be  said  (it  has  been)  that 
even  if  the  words  of  Jesus  do  not  teach  this  doctrine,  the  words 
of  his  disciples  do  teach  it,  for  they  supposed  this  coming  even 
then  near  at  hand.  This  lies  outside  of  the  words  of  Jesus,  and 
therefore  outside  the  limits  of  this  essay ;  yet  still  very  briefly  I 
answer.  If  they  did  so  suppose  they  were  mistaken.  The  facts 
of  the  case  have  shown  their  mistake.  Such  a  personal  coming 
and  visible  reign  on  the  earth  loas  not  then  near  at  hand.  Almost 
two  thousand  years  have  passed,  and  still  Christ's  reign  is  only 
spiritual,  invisible,  "  not  of  this  world  ;  "  and  the  visible,  personal 
coming  has  not  appeared.  If  the  apostles,  under  the  perverting 
influence  of  their  early  Jewish  training,  were  expecting  such  a 
coming  and  such  a  reign  soon — within  their  OAvn  life-time  or 
shortly  after,  it  was  a  mistake.  That  is  the  best  that  can  be  said 
of  it.  It  does  not  become  us  to  make  this  mistake  because  they 
did.  But  let  us  carefully  make  a  broad  discrimination  between 
what  they  thought  during  the  earthly  life-time  of  Jesus,  before 
they  were  enlightened  by  the  Spirit ;  and  what  they  held  and 
taught  when  under  inspiration  they  wrote  their  epistles.  The  for- 
mer is  of  comparatively  small  moment  to  us ;  the  latter  is  worthy 
of  careful  consideration. 

Yet  again :  if  it  be  claimed  that  their  epistles  teach  and  imply 
the  near  visible  coming  of  Christ  to  set  up  a  kingdom  of  this 
world,  then  it  must  still  be  said — on  that  construction  of  their 
words  they  were  mistaken.  If  it  be  retorted  that  this  way  of 
speaking  of  the  apostles  is  damaging  to  their  inspiration,  my  re- 
ply is — Let  those  who  put  this  construction  upon  their  words  see 
to  that.  The  responsibility  is  theirs.  For  myself  I  do  not  be- 
lieve that  Paul  and  James  and  Peter  (at  the  point  when  they 
wrote  for  us  inspired  epistles)  did  believe  at  all  in  Christ's  per- 
sonal, visible  coming  to  reign  on  the  earth  ;  and  of  course  they 
did  not  believe  that  such  a  coming  for  such  a  reign  was  then  near 
at  hand.  My  construction  of  their  words  does  not  at  all  imply  that 
at  the  time  of  writing  their  epistles  they  held  erroneous  views  on 
this  point.  They  do  seem  to  have  been  under  somewhat  grave 
misapprehensions  on  this  subject  up  to  and  at  the  time  of  Christ's 
death.  Immediately  before  his  ascension,  they  put  the  question — 
"Wilt  thou  at  this  time  restore  again  the  kingdom  to  Israel?" 
(Acts  1 :  6).  How  soon  the  teaching  Spirit  eliminated  from  their 
minds  whatever  was  erroneous  on  this  subject,  is  not  revealed — 
perhaps  can  not  be  certainly  known.  But  to  hang  a  whole  sys- 
tem of  faith  in  a  visible  and  personal  reign  of  Christ  on  this 
earth  upon  their  early  misconceptions  would  be  superlatively  un- 
fortunate, not  to  say  unwise. 


LECTURE-IIOOM  NOTES. 


VAN  DOREN'S  SUG&ESTIVE  COMMENTARY. 


D.  APPLETON  &  CO.,  Broad^yay,  New  York;  E.  Di€KlN30N,  T3 
Farriugdcn  St.,  Loudon. 

The  following  Scholars  are  iniercsted  in  the  Scries : 
GEJNBSIS. — Professor  Beecher,  Auburn  Theological  Seminary. 
BOOK  OF  JOB.— Tnos.  Robinson,  D.  D.,  England. 
PSALMS.— Professor  I.  Murphy,  D.  D.,  Belfast  Theological  Seminary. 
ECCLESIASTES  AND  PROVERBS.— L.  Young,  D.  D.,  Virginia. 
ISAIAH. — Professor  Smythe,  D.  D.,  Londonderry  Theological  Seminary. 

MATTHEW Professor  J.  Vernahan,  Ph.  D.,  London. 

LUKE.- W.  H.  Van  Doren,  D.  D.,  Chicago.     2  vols.     (Aow  readi/.) 
JOHN.— W.  H.  Van  Doren,  D.  D.,  Chicago.     2  vols.     {A'ow  ready.) 
ACTS.- W.  R.  Gordon,  D.  D.,  New  Jersey. 
ROMANS.— TnoiiAS  Robinson,  D.  D.,  Morpetli,  England.    2  vols.    {Now 

ready. ) 
GALATIAN3.— Professor  T.  Crosket,  Londonderry. 
HEBREWS.— Rev.  Thomas  Doggett,  Niagara. 
CATHOLIC  EPISTLES.— J.  Demarest,  D.  D.,  New  Jersey. 


Rev.  Er.  FAUSSET,  Terrk,  England,  the  Commentator. 
•'  I  know  no  exposition  of  Scripture  so  terse,  so  suggestive,  and  yet  &o  full  and  so 
clear." 

DEAN  ALFORD,  tlu  Commentator. 
After  a  Ion?-,  friendly  letter,  he  .npoloirizes  thus;  "I  have  had  time  only  to  read 
sixty  pages.    It  will  be  a  most  useful  work." 

Rev.  CHAS.  LEE,  Havestoch  Hill. 
"  The  work  of  Dr.  Van  Doren  contains  the  maximum  of  thought  in  the  minimum 
of  space." 

THE  HOMILIST,  London. 
"The  idea  of  this  series  is  an  unusually  happy  one.      It  is   preeminenth'  sug- 
gestive." 

THE  FREEMAN,  London. 
"  This  work  is  much  after  our  own  heart.    These  volumes  arc  among  our  best 
helps." 

THE  CHURCHMAN,  London. 
"This  work  contains  under  each  sentence  a  few  brief,  well-chosen  notes,  which  will 
be  found  of  great  value." 

SWORD  AND  TROWEL,  Spurgeon,  Editor. 
"This  commentary  is  novel  m  its  arrangement,  and  well  sustains  its  title  of 
suggestive." 


CHRISTIAN  WORLD,  London. 
"Dr.  Van  Doren's  work  is  more  condensed  than  Lange's,  containing  the  pith  and 
marrow  of  criticism,    it  will  be  prized  by  all  who  love  the  doctrines  of  the  Kefor- 
mation." 

MORNINa  STAR,  London. 
"  In  this  work  are  condensed  the  thought  and  criticism  of  many  volumes.    We 
shall  hall  with  delight  a  complete  work  on  tuis  admirable  plan." 

J.  C.  RYliB,  D.  D.,  Commentator. 
"  A  curious  and  original  work.     It  succeeds  in  supplying  an  astonishing  amount 
of  thought  and  criticism  in  very  lew  lines." 

Rsv.  JAMES  HAMILTOlSr,  D.  D. 

"  I  am  sure  Dr.  Van  Doren  will  have  the  gratitude  of  all  whoce  books  are  few  and 
■whose  time  is  precious." 

R3V.  J.  JONES,  of  Belfast. 
"To  ministers  and  school-teachers  I  would  say,  that  they  will  bere  find  an  amount 
of  knowledge,  in  my  judgment,  not  to  be  found  in  the  same  space  anywhere  else." 

Vr.  L.  ALEXANDER,  D.  D.,  Edinburgh. 
"  I  am  much  pleased  with  the  plan,  and  with  the  success  with  which  it  has  been 
carried  out." 

THE  FORWARD,  London. 
"  This  work  is  cheap,  compact,  and  suited  to  this  hard-working  age.     The  plan  is 
new  and  useful." 

BAPTIST  MESSENGER,  London. 
"In  ordinar}'  cases  we  do  not  consult  commentators  In  two  cases  out  of  ten  with 
real  advantage.    But  in  the  'Suggestive  Commentary'  we  have  not  in  a  single  instance 
been  disappointed." 

BRITISH  GITARTERLY,  London. 
"Dr.  Van  Doren,  in  the  form  of  short  sentences,  brings  together  the  gist  of  all  pre- 
vious commentators,  and  supphes  abundance  of  hints  to  those  who  have  but  little 
leisure." 

ENGLISH  PRESBYTERIAN,  London. 
"  To  clergymen  and  students  this  work  is  invaluable.     TVe  have  brought  the  work 
ondcr  the  special  notice  of  oiiy  friends  in  private." 

WESLEY  AN  TIMES,  London. 
"  An  excellent  idea,  admirably  worked  out.  We  have  tested  the  work  on  the  Lord's 
Prayer,  and  we  cordially  commend  it." 

WESLEYAN  METHODIST  TIMES, 

"  It  is  a  work  to  make  men  think,  and  not  save  them  from  thinking.  These  vol- 
umes will  be  welcome  to  many  a  student  of  the  Scriptures.  Hard-worked  ministers 
and  Bible-class  teachers  will  be  well  repaid  by  studjing  them." 

THE  INDEPENDENT,  London. 
"  This  is  a  remarkable  work,  and  valuable  as  well.      If  there  ever  was  midtum  in 
parvo,  it  is  here  found.     The  labor  in  preparing  it  must  have  been  immense.    The 
work  is  eminently  suggestive,  and  will  save  an  enormous  amount  of  time." 

L.  HALSEY,  D.  D.,  Professor  Theological  Seminary,  Chicago. 
"  Every  page  bears  marks  of  thorough  and  accurate  scholarship,  and  of  patient, 
careful  study.     It  is  the  most  readable  commentary  we  have  ever  met.     It  is  impos- 
sible to  say  things  m  quicker  time  or  narrower  space  than  he  has  said  them." 

G.  B.  CHEEVER,  D.  D. 

"  It  is  admir.ib!e.    The  best  rmdtum,  in  parvo  I  have  ever  seen." 

PRINCETON  REVIEW. 
"This  work  has  been  highly  recommended  by  th3  journals  of  Great  Britain.  It  cer- 
tainly evinces  thought,  labor,  and  learning."' 


GowLEs's  Notes  on  the  Old  Testamski 


I.     THE  3IIXQli   PROPHETS, 

1  vol.,  12mo.     $2.00. 


IJ.    EZEKIEL   AKD   DANIEL, 

1  vol.,  12mo.     $2.25. 


Ill,    ISAIAH. 

1  vol.,  12mo.     $2.25. 


JF.    PROVERBS,   ECCLESIASTES,    AND 

THE   SONG    OF  SOLOMON. 

1  vol.,  12mo.     $2.00. 


r.    NOTES    ON  JERE3IIAU. 

1  vol.,  12mo.     $2.25. 


By   Rev.    HENRY   COWLES,    D.    D. 


From  'flie  Christian  Intelligencer,  N.  T. 
"  These  works  are  designed  for  both  pastor  and  people.  They  embody  th^j  re- 
sults of  much  resoarch,  and  elucidate  the  text  of  sacred  Scripture  with  admirable 
fcTce  and  simpliciti'.  The  learned  professor,  h'xna^  devoted  many  years  to  th« 
close  and  devout  study  of  the  Bible,  seems  to  have  become  thoroujrhiy  furnished 
with  all  needful  materials  to  produce  a  useful  and  trustworthy  commentary." 

From  Dr.  Leonard  Bacon,  of  Yale  College. 
"There  is.  within  ray  knowledcje,  no  other  work  on  the  same  portions  of  the 
Bible,  combining-  so  much  of  the  results  of  accurate  scholarship  -with  so  >auch  com- 
mon-sense and  so  much  of  a  practical  and  devotional  spirit." 

From  Rev.  Dr.  S.  Wolcott,  of  Cleveland,  Ohio. 
"The  author,  who  ranks  as  a  scholar  with  the  most  eminent  graduates  of  Yala 
Collecre,  has  devoted  years  to  the  study  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures  in  the  ori^nal 
tonsriies,  and  the  fruits  of  careful  and  independent  research  appear  in  this  work. 
With  sound  scholarship  the  writer  combines  the  unction  of  deep  religious  expe- 
rience, an  earnest  love  of  the  truth,  with  a  remarkable  freedom  from  all  fancifai 
•peculation,  a  candid  judgment,  and  the  faculty  of  expressing  his  thoughts  cleailj 
and  forcibly." 

From  President  E.  B.  Fairfield,  of  ITillsdale  College. 
"t  am  very  much  pleased  Arith  your  Commentary.  It  meets  a  want  which 
aas  lon^  been  felt.  For  various  reasons,  the  ^vriting■s  of  the  prophets  have  const' 
tuted  a  sealed  book  to  a  larjo  part  of  the  ministry  as  wall  as  most  of  the  common 
people.  They  aie  not  sufliciently  understood  to  m.a>:o  them  appreciated.  Tool 
Drtef  notes  relieve  them  of  all  their  want  of  interest  tt  commoQ  readers,  I  tbbih 
rea  bare  aald  'ost  enoucrh." 


INTERNATIONAL  SCIENTIFIC  SERIES. 


N  OIV    R  E  A  D  y. 

Ko.  1.  FOBMS  OF  WATER,  in  Clouds,  Rain,  Klvers,  Ice,  and  Glaciers.  By 
i'rof.  John  Tvndall,  LL.  D.,  F.  R.  S.     i  vol.     Cloth.     I'rice,  $1.50. 

No.  2.  PHYSICS  AND  POLITICS;  or,  Thoughts  on  the  Application  of  the 
Principles  of  "  Natural  Selection"  and  "  Inheritance"  to  Political  Society. 
By  Walter  Bagehot,  Esq.,  author  of  "  The  English  Constitution."  i 
vol.     Cloth.     Price,  $1.50. 

No.  3.  POODS.  By  Edward  Smith,  M.  D.,  LL.  B.,  F.  R.  S.  i  vol.  Cloth. 
Price,  $1.75. 

No.  4.  MIND  AND  BODY.  The  Theories  of  their  Relation.  By  Alex. 
Bain,  LL.  D. ,  Piofessor  of  Logic  in  the  University  of  Aberdeen,  i  vol., 
i2mo.     Cloth.     Price,  $1.50. 

No.    a.  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.     By  Hekbekt  Spencer.    Piice, 

$1.50. 

No.  6.  THE  NEW  CHEMISTRY.  By  Prof  Josiah  P.  Cooke,  Jr.,  of  Har- 
vard University,     i  vol.,  i2mo.      Cloth.     Piice,  $2.00. 

No.  7.  THE  CONSERVATION  OF  ENERGY.  By  Prof.  Balfour 
Stewart,  LL.  D.,  F.  R.  S.      i  vol.,  i2mo.     Cloth.     Price,  $1.50. 

No.     8.  ANIMAL    LOCOMOTION;    or.  Walking,  Swimming,  and  Flying, 

with  a  Dissertation   on  Aeronautics.  By   T-    Bell   I'ettigkew,  M.  D., 

F.R.  S.,   F.  R.  S.  E.,   F.  R.  C.  P.  E.  i  vol.,   ismo.      Fully  illustrated. 
Price,  $1.75. 

No.    9.  RESPONSIBILITY  IN    MENTAL   DISEASE.    By  Henry 

iMaudsley,  JM.  D.     I  vol.,  i2mo.     Cloth.     Piice,  $1.50. 

No.  10.  THE  SCIENCE  OF  LAW.  By  Prof.  Sheldon  Amos,  i  vol.,  i2mo. 
Cloth.     Price,  $1.75. 

No.  11.  ANIMAL  MECHANISM.  A  Treatise  on  Terrestrial  and  Aerial 
Locomotion.     By  E.  J.  Marev.     With  117  Illustrations.     Price,  $1.73. 

No.  12.  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  CONFLICT  BETWEEN  RE- 
LIGION AND  SCIENCE.  By  John  Wm.  Draper,  M.  D.,  LL.  D., 
author  of  "The  Intellectual  Development  of  Europe."     Price,  $1.75. 

No.  13.  THE  DOCTRINE    OF   DESCENT   AND  DARWINISM. 

By  Prof.  Oscar  Schmidt,  Strasburg  University.     Price,  $1.50. 

No.  14.  THE  CHEMISTRY  OF  LIGHT  AND  PHOTOGRAPHY. 

In  its  Application  to  Art,  Science,  and  Industry.     By  Dr.  Hermann  Vo- 
GEL.     loo  Illustrations.     Price,  $2.00. 

No.  15.  FUNGI;  their  Nature,  Influence,  and  Uses.  By  M  C.  CoOKE,  M.  A., 
LL.  D.     Edited  by  Rev.   M.  J.  Berkeley,  ]\I.  A.,  F.  L.  S.     With  109 

Illustrations.     Price,  $1.50. 

No.  16.  THE  LIFE  AND  GROWTH  OF  LANGUAGE.  By  Prof. 
W.  D.  Whitney,  of  Yale  College.     Price,  $1.50. 

No.  17.  MONEY  AND  THE  MECHANISM  OF  EXCHANGE. 

By  W.  Stanley  Jeyons,  IM.  A.,  F.  R.  S.,  Professor  of  Logic  and  Politi- 
cal Economy  in  the  Owens  College,  Manchester.     Price,  $1.75. 

No.  18.  THE  NATURE  OF  LIGHT,  with  a  General  Account  of  Physical 
Optics.  By  Dr.  Eugene  Lommel,  Professor  of  Physics  in  the  University 
of  Erlangen.  With  188  Illustrations  and  a  Plate  of  Spectra  in  Chromo- 
lithography.     Price,  $2.00. 

No.  19.  ANIMAL  PARASITES  AND  MESSMATES.  By  Monsieur 
Van  Beneden,  Professor  of  the  University  of  Loiivain,  Correspondent  of 
the  Institute  of  France.     With  S3  Illustrations.     {Ingress.) 

D.  APPLETON  &  CO.,  Publishers,  549  6c  551  Broadway,  N.  Y. 


A  SUPERB   NEW  WORK   BY   LACROIX. 


THE  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY. 

THE  MANNERS,  CUSTOMS,  AND  COSTUMES  OF  THE  EIGH- 
TEENTH CENTURY,  JN  FRANCE,  1 700-1 789. 

Illustrated  with  twenty-one  magnificent  Chrnmo-lithographs  (art-gems  in  themselves), 
and  three  hundred  and Jlfty  highly-finished  Wood-Engravings  after  Watteau,  Van- 
loo,  Rigaiid,  Boucher,  Lancret,  J.  Vernet,  Chardin,  Jeaurat,  Beauchardon,  Saint- 
Aubin,  Eisen,  Gravelot,  Moreau,  Cochin,  Wille,  Dcbucourt,  etc.  The  designs, 
hthographs,  and  engravings,  all  executed  by  eminent  artists,  under  the  direction  of 
M.  Racinet,  the  well-known  author  of  "Polychromatic  Ornament."  In  one  sump- 
tuous volume,  imperial  3vo,  cloth,  emblematic  gilt  sides,  and  gilt  edges,  $15;  half 
calf,  $18;  calf,  $21;  tree  calf,  $28;  morocco,  extra,  $24. 
The  comprehensive  character  of  this  work  will  be  appreciated  more  fully  by  noting 

contents,  embracing,  as  they  do,  the  social  ranks  and  customs,  the  public  occupations, 

amusements,  etc.,  of  "  La  Belle  France,"  as  follows,  viz. : 


1.  The  King  and  the  Court. 

2.  The  Nobles. 

3.  The  Bourgeoisie. 

4.  The  People. 

5.  The  .Army  and  Navj'. 

6.  The  Clergy. 

7.  The  Parliament. 


8.  The  Finances, 
g.   Commerce. 

10.  Education. 

11.  Charities. 

12.  Justice  and  Police. 

13.  Aspect  of  Paris. 


14.  Fetes  and  Pleasures  of 

Paris. 

15.  The  Cuisine  and  Table. 

16.  The  Theatres. 

17.  The  Salons. 

18.  Voyages,  etc. 

19.  Costumes  and  Modes. 


*.y*  The  splendid  success  of  the  various  works  of  M.  Lacroi.v,  on  the  "Manners, 
Customs,  and  Dress,  during  the  Middle  Ages,  and  during  the  Renaissance,"  suggested 
the  preparation  of  a  work  of  a  similar  character,  on  the  "Institutions,  Manners,  and 
Dress,  in  France,  during  the  Eighteenth  Century."  This  su  nptuous  volume  is  a 
brilliant  exhibition  of  every  grade  of  life  and  society  in  France,  from  1700  to  1789.  The 
work  is  illustrated  with  21  full-page  Chromo-lithographs,  richly  colored,  and  350  beau- 
tiful Engravings  on  Wood.  These  illustrations  are  copied  with  the  utmost  care  from 
the  original  paintings  of  the  best  and  most  esteemed  artists  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
and  in  beauty  of  design,  exquisite  finish,  and  the  real  interest  of  their  subjects,  far 
sur|>as3  any  similar  productions.  The  typographical  excellence,  and  elaborate  and 
appropriate  binding,  combined  with  its  intrinsic  literary  and  artibtic  value,  render  it 
oai  of  the  richest  volumes  ever  published. 


OTHER    WORKS  BY  THE  SAME  AUTHOR. 

THE  ARTS  IN  THE  MIDDLE  AGES,  and  at  the  Period  of  the  Renaissance. 
V,y  P.\UL  Lacroix,  Curator  of  the  Imperial  Library  of  the  Arsenal,  Paris.  Illus- 
trated with  19  Chromo-lithographic  Prints  by  Kellerhoven,  and  upward  of  400  En- 
gravin,^s  on  Wood,  i  vol.,  imperial  8vo,  cloth,  gilt  sides  and  back.  520  pages. 
Price,  .$12;  half  calf,  $15;  half  morocco,  $15;  full  calf,  $18;  full  morocco,  $25. 

MANNERS,  CUSTOMS,  AND  DRESS,  DURING  THE  MIDDLE  AGES, 
and  during  the  Renaissance  Period.  By  P.^UL  Lacroix.  Illustrated  with  15 
Chromo-lithographic  Prints  by  F.  Kellerhoven,  and  upward  of  400  Engravings  on 
Wood.  I  vol.,  royal  8vo.  Half  morocco,  price,  $12;  half  morocco,  e-xtra,  $15; 
half  calf,  $15;  calf,  ^18;  tree  calf,  $25;  morocco,  e.xtra,  $21;  morocco,  super 
extra,  $25. 

MILITARY  AND  RELIGIOUS  LIFE  IN  THE  MIDDLE  AGES,  and  at  the 
Period  of  the  Renaissance.  By  Pacl  IjACROix.  Illustrated  with  14  Chromo- 
lithogr.aphic  Prints  by  J.  Kellerhoven,  R^jamey.  and  L.  Allard,  and  upward  of  400 
Engravings  on  Wood,  i  vol.,  royal  Svo.  Half  bound,  $12;  half  calf  and  mo- 
rocco, $15  ;  calf,  $18  ;  tree  calf,  $25 ;  morocco,  extra,  $21  ;  super  extra,  $25. 

D.  APFLETON  &  CO.,  Publishers, 

519  &  551  Broadway,  New  York. 


MEMOIRS  OF  fiESEEAL  WILLIAM  T,  SHEEIAN, 

WRITTEN  BY  HIMSELF.  Complete  in  Two  Volumes.  With  a  Military  Map 
showing  the  Marches  of  the  Armies  under  General  Sherman's  Command,  inserted 
in  a  pocket  at  the  end  of  the  second  volume  ;  size,  30  by  47  inches.  Small  8vo,  400 
pages  each.  Price,  in  Blue  Cloth,  $5-50;  Sheep,  $7.00;  Half  Morocco,  $8.50; 
FuU  Morocco,  $12.00. 

"  These  memoirs  are  by  far  the  most  interesting  and  Important  contribution  yet  made 
to  the  military  history  of  the  Rebellion  by  any  of  the  leading  actors  in  the  great  strug- 
gle. The  staggering  blows  which  CJeneral  Sherman  dealt  to  the  Confederacy  have  se- 
cured him  the  undying  gratitude  of  his  countrymen,  while  the  brilliancy  which  he  dis- 
plaj'ed  as  a  strategist,  and  the  surpa>sing  ability  which  he  developed  as  a  cummander, 
entitle  him  to  rank  among  the  most  distinguished  leaders  that  the  world  has  produced. 
The  personal  history  of  so  marked  a  man  must  always  possess  extraordinary  interest. 
When  it  is  related  by  the  man  himself,  and  in  that  peculiarly  racy  style  which  General 
Sherman's  letters  and  speeches  have  made  familiar  to  the  public,  it  becomes  not  only 
absorbing  but  fascinating.  The  march  from  Atlanta  began  on  the  morning  of  Novem- 
ber 15th.  General  Sherman's  narrative  of  this  whole  movement  is  of  romantic  interest. 
Some  of  his  descriptions  are  not  only  picturesque  but  thrilling  in  their  eloquence.  And 
interspersed  are  \\  ell-told  incidents,  many  of  them  full  of  genuine  humor,  which  give 
unusual  vivacity  to  the  story.  In  military  annals  the  narrative  is  unique,  but  it  must 
be  read  in  its  entiretj'  to  be  appreciated.  'J'he  terse,  clear,  vigorous  English  in  which 
the  memoirs  are  written  is  one  of  their  greatest  charms.  This  fitly  reflects  the  intense 
personality  of  the  man.  The  straightforward,  spirited  narrative  will  enable  a  grateful 
country  better  to  appreciate  the  immense  value  of  the  services  which  General  Sherman 
rendered  it  in  the  critical  period  throug'n  which  he  helped  guide  it,  and  it  will  also  aid 
others  than  Americans  in  forming  a  clearer  estimate  of  the  tremendous  struggle  in  which 
the  author  of  these  memoirs  bore  so  distinguished  a  part." — N.   i'.  Times. 

"An  autobiography  so  unresen'ed  as  this  of  General  Sherman,  printed  diiring  the 
lifetime  of  the  writer,  would  certainly  be  an  unsafe  procedure  for  one  who  had  the  least 
need  of  anj'  assistance  from  humbug.  The  author  of  these  memoirs  is  a  man  who  can 
afford  to  be  seen  as  he  is.  Strip  him  of  his  epaulets,  his  brass  buttons,  and  his  cocked 
hat,  and  he  still  appears  a  valiant,  able,  and  distinguished  person.  Indeed,  it  is  quite 
necessary  that  he  should  be  stripped  of  these  accoutrements.  We  need  to  see  him  amid 
the  camp-fires  of  Georgia,  or  on  the  march  with  his  wagon-trains  and  foraging-bummers. 
So  much  for  the  picturesque  and  external  man.  But  there  is  no  need  that  he  should 
conceal  the  mind  behind  all  this.  General  Sherman  has  told  his  story  with  the  most  en- 
tire unreserve,  and  the  story  is  one  which  Americans  will  be  proud  to  read.  We  cannot 
help  a  feeling  of  satisfaction  in  being  of  the  same  race  and  the  same  country  with  such  a 
man.  We  have  here  a  picture  of  a  person,  resolute  yet  cautious,  bold  yet  prudent,  con- 
fident yet  modest ;  a  man  of  action  to  his  finger-ends,  yet  withal  something  of  a  poet; 
we  see  all  through  the  book  the  evidences  of  a  chivalrous  mind  and  of  an  intellect  of 
singular  force  and  precision.  .  .  .  We  have  spoken  of  Sherman  as,  in  some  sort,  a  poet. 
All  through  these  great  campaigns,  while  his  whole  mind  is  absorbed  with  the  events  he 
is  conducting,  he  nevertheless  appears  to  take  a  poet's  joy  in  the  spectacle  of  his  battle- 
fields and  moving  armies.  His  enthusiasm  will  be  shared  by  his  readers.  That  passage 
in  which  he  speaks  of  his  last  look  on  Atlanta,  and  tells  us  how  it  brought  to  his  mind 
'many  a  thought  of  desperate  battle,  of  hope  and  fear,'  has  an  eloquence  which  no  mere 
wTiter  of  books  can  reach.  The  skill  to  write  in  that  way  is  not  taught  in  Blair  or 
Whately." — N.  Y.  Evening  Post. 

"  Slierman  shows  that  he  can  wield  the  pen  as  well  as  the  sword.  His  stj-le  is  a.s 
much  his  own  as  that  of  Caesar  or  Napoleon.  It  is  a  winning  style.  We  see  a  gifted 
man  telling  his  life  in  a  plain,  artless  fashion,  but  with  a  trenchant  rhetoric.  Whenever 
an  opinion  is  demanded  he  gives  it.  His  picture  of  the  earlj'  days  in  California  is  as 
graphic  as  a  chapter  from  Sir  Walter  Scott.  Now  and  then  there  are  criticisms  upon 
his  contemporaries  which  w'ill  provoke  comment;  but,  plainly  enough,  Sherman  means 
what  he  says.  This  is  the  value  of  the  work.  We  are  glad  the  General  has  %vritten  it. 
In  many  cases  it  throws  new  light  upon  the  Rebellion.  Only  by  such  hght  can  the  full 
measure  of  that  momentous  time  be  taken.  And,  whatever  criticisms  may  be  made 
upon  the  book,  we  honor  the  General  for  having  given  us  so  graphic  and  just  a  his- 
loiy  of  events  in  which  he  himself  was  so  illustrious  and  successful  an  actor." — A'.  K. 
Herald. 

D.  APPLETON  &•  CO.,  Publishers,  549  ^  551  Broadit'aj;  N.  Y 


"A  rich  list  of  fruitful  topics'' 

Boston  Commonwealth. 


HEALTH  AND  EDUCATION, 

By   the   Rev.    CHARLES   KINGSLEY,    F.  L.   S.,    F.   G.   S., 

CANON  OF  WESTMINSTER. 

i2mo.     Cloth Price,  $1.75. 

"It  is  most  refreshing  to  meet  an  earnest  soul,  and  such,  preeminently,  is  Charles 
Kingsley,  and  he  has  shown  himself  such  in  every  thing  he  has  written,  from  '  Alton 
Locke '  and  '  Village  Sermons,'  a  quarter  of  a  century  since,  to  the  present  volume,  which 
is  no  exception.  Here  are  fifteen  Essays  and  Lectures,  excellent  and  interesting  in 
different  degrees,  but  all  exhibiting  the  author's  peculiar  characteristics  of  thought 
and  style,  and  some  of  them  blending  most  valuable  instruction  with  entertainment, 
as  few  living  writers  can." — Hartford  Post. 

"That  the  title  of  this  book  is  not  expressive  of  its  actual  contents,  is  made  mani- 
fest by  a  mere  glance  at  its  pages ;  it  is,  in  fact,  a  collection  of  Essays  and  Lectures, 
written  and  delivered  upon  various  occasions  by  its  distinguished  author;  as  such  it 
cannot  be  otherwise  than  readable,  and  no  intelligent  mind  needs  to  be  assured  that 
Charles  Kingsley  is  fascinating,  whether  he  treats  of  Gothic  Architecture,  Natural 
History,  or  the  Education  of  Women.  The  lecture  on  Thrift,  which  was  intended  for 
the  women  of  England,  may  be  read  with  profit  and  pleasure  by  the  women  of 
everywhere." — St.  Louis  De>nocrat. 

"  The  book  contains  exactly  what  every  one  needs  to  know,  and  in  a  form  which 
every  one  can  understand." — Boston  Journal. 

"  This  volume  no  doubt  contains  his  best  thoughts  on  all  the  most  important  topics 
of  the  day." — Detroit  Post. 

"Nothing  could  be  better  or  more  entertaining  for  the  family  librarj'." — Zion'i 
Herald. 

"For  the  style  alone,  and  for  the  vivid  pictures  frequently  presented,  this  latest 
production  of  Mr.  Kingsley  commends  itself  to  readers.  The  topics  treated  are 
mostly  practical,  but  the  manner  is  always  the  manner  of  a  master  in  composition. 
Whether  discussing  the  abstract  science  of  health,  the  subject  of  ventilation,  the 
education  of  the  different  classes  that  form  English  society,  natural  history,  geology, 
heroic  aspiration,  superstitious  fears,  or  personal  communication  with  Nature,  we 
find  the  same  freshness  of  treatment,  and  the  same  eloquence  and  affludVice  of  language 
that  distinguish  the  productions  in  other  fields  of  this  gifted  author." — Boston  Gazette. 

D.  APPLETON  &  CO.,  PuUisliers, 

549  &  551  Broadway,  N.  Y. 


THE  EXPANSE  OF  HEAVEN; 

A  Series  of  £ssays  on  the  JVonders  of  the  Firmament. 

By   R.   A.    PROCTOR,    B.  A. 

I  vol.,  l2mo.     Cloth Price,  $2.co. 

"  It  is  IMr.  Proctor's  good  fortune  that  not  only  is  he  one  of  the  great- 
est of  living  astronomers,  but  that  he  has  a  power  of  imparting  knowl- 
edge that  is  not  equaled  by  any  living  astronomer.  His  style  is  as 
lucid  as  the  light  with  which  he  deals  so  largely,  and  the  plainest  of 
readers  can  go  along  with  him  with  entire  ease,  and  comprehend  all 
that  he  says  on  the  grandest  subject  ever  discussed  by  mortal  intelli- 
gence. Most  scientific  writers  either  cannot  or  will  not  so  use  the  pen 
as  to  make  themselves  understood  by  the  many;  not  so  with  Mr. 
Proctor :  he  both  can  and  does  so  write  as  to  command  the  attention  of 
the  million,  and  this  too  without  in  the  least  derogating  from  the  real 
dignity  of  his  sublime  theme.  Few  of  us  can  study  astronomy,  because 
that  implies  a  concentrated  devotion  to  an  inexhaustible  matter,  but 
we  all  can  read  astronomical  works  to  our  great  advantage  if  astrono- 
mers who  write  will  but  write  plainly ;  and  in  that  way,  without  having 
the  slightest  claim  to  be  spoken  of  as  "scientists,"  we  can  acquire  no 
ordinary  amount  of  knowledge  concerning  things  that  are  of  the  loftiest 
nature,  and  the  effect  of  which  must  be  to  elevate  the  mind.  Such  a 
book  as  '  The  Expanse  of  Heaven  '  cannot  fail  to  be  of  immense  use 
in  forwarding  the  work  of  education  even  when  it  is  read  only  for 
amusement,  so  forcible  is  the  impression  it  makes  on  the  mind  from 
the  importance  of  the  subjects  treated  of,  while  the  manner  of  treat- 
ment is  so  good." — Boston  Traveller. 

"Since  the  appearance  of  Ennis's  book  on  'The  Origin  of  the 
Stars,'  we  have  not  read  a  more  attractive  work  on  astronomy  than 
this.  It  is  learned  enough  to  be  instructive,  and  light  enough  to  be 
very  entertaining." — Alta  California. 

"  It  reads  like  a  work  of  fiction,  so  smooth  and  consecutive  is  it; 
but  it  inspires  the  worthiest  thoughts  and  the  highest  aspirations." — 
Boston  Commontvealth. 

"  Perfectly  adapted  to  their  purposes,  namely,  to  awaken  a  love  for 
science,  and  at  the  same  time  to  convey,  in  a  pleasant  manner,  some 
elementary  facts." — Church  Herald. 

"This  is  not  a  technically  scientific  work,  but  an  expression  of  a 
true  scholar's  conception  of  the  vastness  and  grandeur  of  the  heavens. 
There  is  no  dry  detail,  but  blended  with  the  scholar's  discoveries  are 
the  poet's  thoughts,  and  a  true  recognition  of  the  Almighty's  power." 
— Troy  Times, 

D.  APPLETON  &  CO.,  PuUishers, 

549  &  551  Broadway,  N.  Y. 


A  thoughtful  and  valuable  contribution  to  the  best  religious  literature 
of  the  day. 

RELIGION  AND  SCIENCE. 


A  Scries  of  Sunday  Lectures  on  the  Relation  of  Natural  and  Revealed 
Religion,  or  the  Truths  revealed  in  Nature  and  Scripture. 

By   JOSEPH     LE    CONTE, 

PE0FES30B   OP   GEOLOGY   AND   NATURAL   niSTOUr    IN   THE   UNIVERSITY    OF   CALIFORNIA. 

l2mo,  cloth.     Price,  $1  50. 

OPINIONS    OF   TIIE   FMESS. 

•'  This  work  is  chiefly  remarkable  as  a  conscientious  effort  to  reconcile 
the  revelations  of  Science  with  those  of  Scripture,  and  will  be  very  use- 
ful to  teachers  of  the  different  Sunday-schools." — Detroit  Union. 

"It  will  be  seen,  by  this  n'sicnie  of  the  topics,  that  Prof.  Le  Conte 
grapples  with  some  of  the  gravest  questions  which  agitate  the  thinking 
world.  He  treats  of  them  all  with  dignity  and  fairness,  and  in  a  man- 
ner so  clear,  persuasive,  and  eloquent,  as  to  engage  the  undivided  at- 
tention of  the  reader.  We  commend  the  book  cordially  to  the  regard 
of  all  who  are  interested  in  whatever  pertains  to  the  discussion  of  these 
grave  questions,  and  especially  to  those  who  desire  to  examine  closely 
the  strong  foundations  on  which  the  Christian  faith  is  reared." — Boston 
fournal. 

"A  reverent  student  of  Nature  and  religion  is  the  best-qualified  mm 
to  instruct  others  in  their  harmony.  The  author  at  first  intended  his 
work  for  a  Bible-class,  but,  as  it  grcM'  under  his  hands,  it  seemed  well  to 
give  it  form  in  a  neat  volume.  The  lectures  are  from  a  decidedly  re- 
ligious stand-point,  and  as  such  present  a  new  method  of  treatment." 
— Philadelphia  Age. 

"This  volume  is  made  up  of  lectures  delivered  to  his  pupils,  and  is 
written  with  much  clearness  of  thought  and  unusual  clearness  of  ex- 
pression, although  the  author's  English  is  not  always  above  reproach. 
It  is  partly  a  treatise  on  natural  theology  and  partly  a  defense  of  the 
Bible  against  the  assaults  of  modern  science.  In  the  latter  aspect  the 
author's  method  is  an  eminently  wise  one.  He  accepts  whatever  sci- 
ence has  proved,  and  he  also  accepts  the  divine  origin  of  the  Bible. 
V/here  the  two  seem  to  conflict  he  prefers  to  await  the  reconciliaticn, 
which  is  inevitable  if  both  are  true,  rather  than  to  waste  time  and  words 
in  inventing  ingenious  and  doubtful  theories  to  force  them  into  seeming 
accord.  Both  as  a  theologian  and  a  man  of  science.  Prof.  Le  Conte's 
opinions  are  entitled  to  respectful  attention,  and  there  are  few  who  Mill 
not  recognize  his  book  as  a  thoughtful  and  valuable  contribution  to  the 
best  religious  literature  of  the  day." — Neio  York  World. 

D.  APPLETON  &  CO.,  Publishers,  549  &  551  Broadway,  N.  Y. 


The  Recovery  of  Jerusalem. 


Capt.  WILSON,  R.  E.,  and  Capt.  WARREN,  R.  E., 
Etc.,  Etc. 

1  vol.,  Svo.    Cloth.     With  Maps  and  Illustrations. 

Price,   $3.50. 

"  This  is  a  narrative  of  exploration  and  discovery  in  tlie  City  of  Jeru- 
ealera  and  the  Holy  Land.  It  is  a  volume  of  unusual  interest  to  the  stu- 
dent of  antiquities,  and  throws  much  light  upon  what  was  already  partially 
known  about  the  Holy  City,  and  opens  up  many  curious  speculations  and 
suggestions  about  things  that  were  entirely  unknown  until  the  excavations 
and  explorations  commenced  which  the  book  faithfully  records.  The 
maps  and  illustrations  much  enhance  the  interest,  and  aid  in  a  thorough 
understanding  of  the  things  described.  It  is  a  volume  of  over  400  pages, 
8vo.,  bound  in  cloth,  and  altogether  beautifully  presented." — Springfield 
Republican. 


Christ  in   Modern   Life. 

SERMONS   PREACHED    AT   ST.   JAMES'S    CHAPEL. 

By  Rev.  STOPFORD  A.   BROOKE. 

1  vol.,  12mo,    ■  Cloth Price,  $2.00. 

The  main  thought  which  underlies  this  volume  is,  that  the  ideas 
which  Christ  made  manifest  on  earth  are  capable  of  endless  expansion,  to 
suit  the  wants  of  men  in  every  age  ;  and  that  they  do  expand,  developing 
into  new  forms  of  larger  import  and  wider  application,  in  a  direct  pro- 
portion to  that  progress  of  mankind,  of  which  they  are  both  root  and 
sap.  If  we  look  long  and  earnestly  enough,  we  shall  find  in  them  the  ex- 
planation and  solution  not  only  of  our  religious,  but  even  of  our  politi- 
cal and  social  problems.  All  that  is  herein  said  is  rested  upon  the  truth 
that  in  Christ  was  Life,  and  that  this  Life,  in  the  thoughts  and  acts  which 
flowed  from  it,  was,  and  is,  and  always  will  ba,  tlie  light  of  the  race 
of  man. 

D.  APPLET02T  &  CD,  Publkliei's,  New  York. 


BS2601  .C875 

The  Gospel  and  Epistles  of  John: 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00013  6731 


DATE  DUE 


GAYLORD  #3523PI       Printed  in  USA 


